T1B

Posted: **Tue Nov 04, 2008 7:06 pm**

World hopes for a "less arrogant" America.

Well isn't that special?

I guess we should feel sorta' flattered that people in countries around the world are deeply interested in and feel affected by who gets elected POTUS.

Yet I doubt Americans who are seen as arrogant by furriners are going to be any more or less "arrogant" regardless of the outcome. For instance, when's the last time we gave a fuck who got elected PM of say, Canada or France?

Nevertheless, it's still rather remarkable that they're having election watch parties around the world fervently hoping that Obama gets coronated. I always like to say to be careful of what you wish for, you just may get it.

Posted: **Tue Nov 04, 2008 7:13 pm**

War Wagon wrote: Yet I doubt Americans who are seen as arrogant by furriners are going to be any more or less "arrogant" regardless of the outcome. For instance, when's the last time we gave a fuck who got elected PM of say, Canada or France?

You really are a stupid son of a bitch.

Please explain, if you can, how those two sentences are even remotely related.

Posted: **Tue Nov 04, 2008 7:21 pm**

Kierland wrote: Please explain, if you can, how those two sentences are even remotely related.

I don't need to explain shit to you, Kweirland, but even if i felt so inclined, such explanation would doubtless go right over your mushy head.

Posted: **Tue Nov 04, 2008 7:23 pm**

So you can't explain how those two sentences relate to each other. Gotcha.

Gawd you are a mindless fucktard.

Posted: **Tue Nov 04, 2008 7:29 pm**

War Wagon wrote:World hopes for a "less arrogant" America.

Well isn't that special?

I guess we should feel sorta' flattered that people in countries around the world are deeply interested in and feel affected by who gets elected POTUS.

Yet I doubt Americans who are seen as arrogant by furriners are going to be any more or less "arrogant" regardless of the outcome. For instance, when's the last time we gave a fuck who got elected PM of say, Canada or France?

Nevertheless, it's still rather remarkable that they're having election watch parties around the world fervently hoping that Obama gets coronated. I always like to say to be careful of what you wish for, you just may get it.

Since the US is "the most powerful nation in the world" and represents a disproportionate percentage of the world economy, why wouldn't the rest of the world be interested? And given the complete clusterfuck that the asshole that you morons voted in eight years ago has made of everything he ever attempted to do, why wouldn't they be fervently hoping that a more intelligent choice is made this time?

And, just because you may not GARA who gets elected in Canada, France or any other countries that you can't find on the map, doesn't mean that there aren't millions of more highly engaged and intelligent people who realize that what happens in the rest of the world actually does have an effect on what happens here.

Posted: **Tue Nov 04, 2008 7:32 pm**

Mikey wrote: And, just because you may not GARA who gets elected in Canada, France or any other countries that you can't find on the map, doesn't mean that there aren't millions of more highly engaged and intelligent people who realize that what happens in the rest of the world actually does have an effect what happens here.

Don't confuse the stupid tard with a coherent take.

Posted: **Tue Nov 04, 2008 7:36 pm**

Mikey wrote:And, just because you may not GARA who gets elected in Canada, France or any other countries that you can't find on the map, doesn't mean that there aren't millions of more highly engaged and intelligent people who realize that what happens in the rest of the world actually does have an effect on what happens here.

So what is happening in the rest of the world that would lead you to believe higher taxes, more socialism, and cap and trade is good for the U.S. ?

Posted: **Tue Nov 04, 2008 7:37 pm**

Tom In VA wrote:So what is happening in the rest of the world that would lead you to believe higher taxes, more socialism, and cap and trade is good for the U.S. ?

Nice retoric you stupid lazy fuckstain.

Posted: **Tue Nov 04, 2008 7:40 pm**

Kierland wrote:
Tom In VA wrote:So what is happening in the rest of the world that would lead you to believe higher taxes, more socialism, and cap and trade is good for the U.S. ?
Nice retoric you stupid lazy fuckstain.

Epic take dude. So you don't know but are too afraid to admit it, I guess that's why you got the tag you have. "Gutless little fella".

Posted: **Tue Nov 04, 2008 7:44 pm**

Tom In VA wrote:.. too afraid to admit it...

Admit what? That you are a stupid fuck who has no idea what the fuck you are talking about so you spew nonsenical shit like mvsKKKal spews racism?

Ok you said it. Now back up your stupid take. Point out how it is a forgone conclusion that that stuff will happen.

Posted: **Tue Nov 04, 2008 7:46 pm**

Tom In VA wrote:
Mikey wrote:And, just because you may not GARA who gets elected in Canada, France or any other countries that you can't find on the map, doesn't mean that there aren't millions of more highly engaged and intelligent people who realize that what happens in the rest of the world actually does have an effect on what happens here.
So what is happening in the rest of the world that would lead you to believe higher taxes, more socialism, and cap and trade is good for the U.S. ?

Why would you assume that's what I believe?

Posted: **Tue Nov 04, 2008 7:50 pm**

Kierland wrote: retoric

you stupid lazy fuckstain.

Way to KYOA, moron.

Posted: **Tue Nov 04, 2008 7:51 pm**

Mikey wrote: Why would you assume that's what I believe?

Because he is part of the stupid right wing echo chamber. Tell me you knew.

Posted: **Tue Nov 04, 2008 7:51 pm**

Kierland wrote:
Tom In VA wrote:.. too afraid to admit it...
Admit what? That you are a stupid fuck who has no idea what the fuck you are talking about so you spew nonsenical shit like mvsKKKal spews racism?

Ok you said it. Now back up your stupid take. Point out how it is a forgone conclusion that that stuff will happen.

You have issues discerning between the interrogative and declarative. That is my take. The evidence is you.

Posted: **Tue Nov 04, 2008 7:52 pm**

War Wagon wrote:
Kierland wrote: retoric

you stupid lazy fuckstain.
Way to KYOA, moron.

That's all you got? A missing 'h?'

Now STFU you stupid vile fuck.

Posted: **Tue Nov 04, 2008 7:54 pm**

Mikey wrote:
Tom In VA wrote:
Mikey wrote:And, just because you may not GARA who gets elected in Canada, France or any other countries that you can't find on the map, doesn't mean that there aren't millions of more highly engaged and intelligent people who realize that what happens in the rest of the world actually does have an effect on what happens here.
So what is happening in the rest of the world that would lead you to believe higher taxes, more socialism, and cap and trade is good for the U.S. ?
Why would you assume that's what I believe?

I based that assumption based on the years of discussing politics with you. While I don't conclude you are "LEFTIST", you do tend to provide takes and responses that betray your favor for a party that often does propose policy more in line with socialist leanings than a libertarian, independent, or republican party.

Posted: **Tue Nov 04, 2008 7:54 pm**

Tom In VA wrote:You have issues discerning between the interrogative and declarative.

No you have issues regarding your head being up your own ass. Now post something true and relevant or STFU you vapid turd.

Posted: **Tue Nov 04, 2008 7:58 pm**

Tom In VA wrote:
I based that assumption based on the years of discussing politics with you. While I don't conclude you are "LEFTIST", you do tend to provide takes and responses that betray your favor for a party that often does propose policy more in line with socialist leanings than a libertarian, independent, or republican party.

While that wasn't the subject of this thread, I'll have to admit that you are very good at

a) subtle deflection
b) painting with a very broad brush

Posted: **Tue Nov 04, 2008 8:17 pm**

Mikey wrote:a) subtle deflection

Well, no, you made a statement that engaged and intelligent people pay attention to what happens in the world as it affects us here. So my question to you, was, how have the policies and decisions of the past several years in say - Europe - affected us ? It apparently hasn't affected the way we think, in terms of governments role and governments ability to tax. Socialism, even some of the more moderate forms of it, does not seem to lend itself to economic progress.

This we can learn, if we pay attention to what happens in other countries. Doesn't seem we've learned it yet.

But I reckon we will.

;)

Posted: **Tue Nov 04, 2008 8:23 pm**

Tom In VA wrote: Socialism, even some of the more moderate forms of it, does not seem to lend itself to economic progress.

Bullshit. There is this country, you may have heard of, that's called the United States of America that has had quite a bit of economic progress over the past century. A country, that already has adopted some forms of socialism for decades.

This whole idea that Obama is here to bring Socialism, as if we haven't had some socialist policies for decades is fucking laughable.

Posted: **Tue Nov 04, 2008 8:23 pm**

Tom In VA wrote:
Mikey wrote:a) subtle deflection
Well, no, you made a statement that engaged and intelligent people pay attention to what happens in the world as it affects us here. So my question to you, was, how have the policies and decisions of the past several years in say - Europe - affected us ? It apparently hasn't affected the way we think, in terms of governments role and governments ability to tax. Socialism, even some of the more moderate forms of it, does not seem to lend itself to economic progress.

This we can learn, if we pay attention to what happens in other countries. Doesn't seem we've learned it yet.

But I reckon we will.

;)

Painting again with an extremely broad brush.

Socialism, even some of the more moderate forms of it, does not seem to lend itself to economic progress.

Now here is a statement that I would challenge you to back up with factual proof.

The US ecomomy has operated under a "moderate" form of socialism for the past century - income tax, social security, government regulation, etc. etc. and has been by far the most successful economic engine in the world for the majority of that time.

Posted: **Tue Nov 04, 2008 8:32 pm**

Mikey wrote:
Socialism, even some of the more moderate forms of it, does not seem to lend itself to economic progress.
Now here is a statement that I would challenge you to back up with factual proof.

The US ecomomy has operated under a "moderate" form of socialism for the past century - income tax, social security, government regulation, etc. etc. and has been by far the most successful economic engine in the world for the majority of that time.

Duly noted and acknowledged, you're right.

In principle though high taxes are not good. The best way I can try to back this up with some facts, is a case study of Ireland.

http://www.taxfoundation.org/research/show/23085.html

In this piece is outlines how Ireland

Ireland, once a poor country, has successfully used its newly lowered corporate tax rate to attract massive amounts of new capital investment, dramatically lower unemployment, and become the "Celtic Tiger," leaping past its neighbors in economic and job growth. Likewise, the report of the Mississippi Tax Study Commission will give the Magnolia State an excellent opportunity to improve its tax climate and become an attractive place for capital, jobs, and entrepreneurs compared to its regional, national, and international competitors.

http://www.capmag.com/article.asp?ID=1836

In early 2000 Ireland adopted a 10% corporate income tax on foreign companies. This policy has led to an economic-financial boom in Ireland that's envied by the tax-crazed Europeans. In 1999 Ireland's equities had underperformed other European equities by 23% points (measured in U.S. dollars); but by mid-2001 they were outperforming those in Europe by 34% points. Ireland also has been attracting entrepreneurs, foreign investment -- and brains. It's now the largest exporter of software in the EU. And today its unemployment rate is down to 3.8% -- well-below Britain's (5.1%) and less than half the jobless rates in high-tax nations like Germany (9.6%), France (9.1%) and Italy (9%).

Thus through tax cuts, the land of pubs and drunks has been "miraculously" transformed into one of high-tech firms and entrepreneurs.

I'll dig around for more I suppose. That's all I have right now.

Posted: **Tue Nov 04, 2008 8:48 pm**

Tom, let's address something for a second. Ireland's boom has been great for some EC entrepreneurs, but not necessarily sustainable for the Irish themselves. Most of Irish exports are via foreign-owned companies. Immigration has skyrocketed; now over 10% of Irish residents are foreign-born...a dramatic shift for that country.

Some of these things sound familiar, eh? How many Americans hope for more and more foreign investment, and more immigration?

Not many - there is a strong nativist flavor to our current politics.

Posted: **Tue Nov 04, 2008 8:57 pm**

Ireland is not a particularly good example of a booming economy right now, either.

But then there aren't many of those at this time anyway.

Posted: **Tue Nov 04, 2008 9:00 pm**

Kierland wrote: That's all you got?

Hey, it's more than what you've got. You simply throw out gratuitous insults. That's the sum total of your game here.

But if you're going to call someone else a "stupid, lazy fuckstain", then you might want to appear not to be a stupid, lazy fuckstain yourself.

EAD, you cum-swilling cocksucker, which is not necessarily a gratuitous insult, since that's your chosen life-style.

Posted: **Tue Nov 04, 2008 9:22 pm**

I asked you to help us all understand wtf you were trying to say with those two sentences. You did a belly flop onto pavement instead. That is not my fault. I am ready willing and able to discuss the topic/s should you, at any time, tells us just wtf you were trying to say.

Your serve fuckstain.

Posted: **Tue Nov 04, 2008 9:25 pm**

Tom In VA wrote:In principle though high taxes are not good.

I don’t know about that. It seems to me that this country was doing pretty well throughout the 50s, 60s and 70s when the highest marginal tax rate on personal income was around 70%.

Posted: **Tue Nov 04, 2008 9:36 pm**

mvscal wrote:So go ahead and write the government a check for 70% of your income and shut the fuck up.

That rate kicked in at a fairly high income level. Not to mention the fact that you completely ignored the point. Nice deflection, pussy

Posted: **Tue Nov 04, 2008 10:06 pm**

PSUFAN,

Intrigued by your response. Thanks. I was looking at it from an oversimplified mathmatical sense. Lowered taxes = more money in the economy. The dynamic you added - isn't immaterial - but just because the Irish plan was geared towards attracting more foreign investment, does that negate the benefit of low taxes to stimulating business, the economy, and even revenue for the government ? Be they foreign firms or domestic ?

Mikey,

Point.

Goober,

Interesting. You would be right , I suppose, people reflect back on those days as being good. The 70's were good for me, but I was a kid. I was unaware taxes were that high in those periods.

Posted: **Tue Nov 04, 2008 10:33 pm**

mvscal wrote:
Goober McTuber wrote: Not to mention the fact that you completely ignored the point.
The point is you don't what the fuck you're talking about. Care to compare the GDP in 1950 to 2007?

It's grown quite a bit. It grew in the 50s, 60s and 70s, and continues to grow. Looks to me like it roughly doubles about every 10 years, and has done so from 1950 moving forward. Regardless of the top marginal income tax rate. I'm not an economist, maybe I'm missing something here, so go ahead and enlighten me.

Are you even capable of having a rational, marginally-polite discussion about anything, or does the election really have you wound this tight?

Posted: **Wed Nov 05, 2008 12:11 am**

I'll be setting up a site to broadcast candle-lit apologies.

I'm sorry United States. I'm sorry. Virginia has assisted in fucking you up the ass. Warner won the senate seat.

Posted: **Wed Nov 05, 2008 1:14 am**

War Wagon wrote:For instance, when's the last time we gave a fuck who got elected PM of say, Canada or France?

canada and France aren't terribly prone to bombing countries for shits and giggles/profit.

Dumbass.

Posted: **Wed Nov 05, 2008 1:24 am**

War Wagon wrote:World hopes for a "less arrogant" America.

If they had said "Less arrogant and more intelligent", we wouldn't need an election to accomplish that.

We'd just have to ask you to leave, Whitey.

Posted: **Wed Nov 05, 2008 1:52 am**

"It is a paradoxical truth that tax rates are too high and tax revenues are too low and the soundest way to raise the revenues in the long run is to cut the rates now ... Cutting taxes now is not to incur a budget deficit, but to achieve the more prosperous, expanding economy which can bring a budget surplus."

– John F. Kennedy, Nov. 20, 1962, president's news conference

"Lower rates of taxation will stimulate economic activity and so raise the levels of personal and corporate income as to yield within a few years an increased – not a reduced – flow of revenues to the federal government."

– John F. Kennedy, Jan. 17, 1963, annual budget message to the Congress, fiscal year 1964

Posted: **Wed Nov 05, 2008 2:34 am**

mvscal wrote:The 70s? Are you high? Jimmy Carter? Stagflation? Any of this ringing bells?

And the GDP roughly doubled from 1970 to 1980.

Posted: **Wed Nov 05, 2008 2:36 am**

mvscal wrote:JFK would probably be considered a right wing whack job today.

Neocon bastard.

Posted: **Wed Nov 05, 2008 2:54 am**

Goober McTuber wrote:And the GDP roughly doubled from 1970 to 1980.

Dear God, GOD, and G0D...

Just had to quote this, before you had a chance to think it over and edit it.

Posted: **Wed Nov 05, 2008 2:57 am**

You KNOW I'm watching this. Getting nicely pissed up, and wishing I could see the faces of the board mongs right about now.

Posted: **Wed Nov 05, 2008 2:57 am**

Dinsdale wrote:
Goober McTuber wrote:And the GDP roughly doubled from 1970 to 1980.

Dear God, GOD, and G0D...

Just had to quote this, before you had a chance to think it over and edit it.

We're growing to be a new country now Dins. The thumpers have been thumped this election. Please adjust your appeals to authority as ...

Dear Science, SCIENCE and SCI3NC3 from now on.

Posted: **Wed Nov 05, 2008 4:47 am**

Tom In VA wrote:
Dinsdale wrote:
Goober McTuber wrote:And the GDP roughly doubled from 1970 to 1980.

Dear God, GOD, and G0D...

Just had to quote this, before you had a chance to think it over and edit it.

We're growing to be a new country now Dins. The thumpers have been thumped this election. Please adjust your appeals to authority as ...

Dear Science, SCIENCE and SCI3NC3 from now on.

Fuck off you tedious little twat.

Dins, feel free to actually address/attack the point. Your vacuous posturing adds little to the discussion. I'm trying to understand why the economy did so well with that high marginal tax rate. It seems that once it was drastically reduced (I believe that would be under the Reagan administration), we started to see the national debt ratchet upwards.

T1B

The world is watching this election

The world is watching this election

Re: The world is watching this election

Re: The world is watching this election

Re: The world is watching this election

Re: The world is watching this election

Re: The world is watching this election

Re: The world is watching this election

Re: The world is watching this election

Re: The world is watching this election

Re: The world is watching this election

Re: The world is watching this election

Re: The world is watching this election

Re: The world is watching this election

Re: The world is watching this election

Re: The world is watching this election

Re: The world is watching this election

Re: The world is watching this election

Re: The world is watching this election

Re: The world is watching this election

Re: The world is watching this election

Re: The world is watching this election

Re: The world is watching this election

Re: The world is watching this election

Re: The world is watching this election

Re: The world is watching this election

Re: The world is watching this election

Re: The world is watching this election

Re: The world is watching this election

Re: The world is watching this election

Re: The world is watching this election

Re: The world is watching this election

Re: The world is watching this election

Re: The world is watching this election

Re: The world is watching this election

Re: The world is watching this election

Re: The world is watching this election

Re: The world is watching this election

Re: The world is watching this election

Re: The world is watching this election

Re: The world is watching this election