The Heritage Foundation Discredits Obama's Tax Claims - Page 9

Anikdote · #81 (**permalink**) 04-17-2009, 05:59 PM

Ad hom attack are always the sign of a weak argument.

You simply can't win by poisoning the well.

thoughtprocess · #82 (**permalink**) 04-18-2009, 05:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sec

thank you for understanding my point. They are government created jobs funded by taxpayer dollars, or in reality, debt. What happens to those "workers" when the govt job is complete? Do we keep funding their jobs or have massive layoffs? What will occur is they will be rolled into the budget, which will increase even more, or, they will be transfoerred to the states who will need to either cut the jobs, thus sparing team Obama the result of their faield plans. Or, the states will raise taxes to keep the govt jobs funded. or, the states will need more fed govt money and the fed govt would raise taxes, to give to the states, so the "jobs created" by them would get funded.

No govt created job will be deleted before the next presidential election. That would be political suicide for Obama so even the budget forecasts will be BS because they need those govt funded employees to vote Liberal (err I mean Dem) so we can't eliminate any of the "new jobs"

Why doesn't team Obama just call it what it is; WELFARE, or maybe the less stinging word, WORKFARE.

But you forget one mere fact. These projects wont take merely a year or two lol. We have a lot to do its weak everywhere. So the arguement becomes provide an American work for at least 5 years while we gain revenue. Or leave them to find their own in a time when none is being provided.? Its really not a hard choice in terms of what consequences Obama will face and that is none. Because these projects seem to be an endless list. EVERY STATE HAS A LIST. From bridges , levee's to roads.

These people will be working at least until the next presidential election cycle.

Its not infrastructure that is the problem the real question is whats next after it? That really determines if we will make money as a nation or not. Because even before infrastructure if we dont have a product then we are doomed anyway by prior big spending and this continued loss of jobs.

When American companies rather send your jobs out do you think other countries will bring their jobs here? And the answer is yes to gain more influence. That is the biggest threat not infrastructure spending and making jobs.

BuckNaked · #83 (**permalink**) 04-20-2009, 07:24 AM

Cause And Consequence;

Quote:

Yea all of these businesses going belly up must be making too much money. Oh wait.
Smoke and mirrors? So taxes don't affect a business' ability to compete? Let's just raise the corporate tax rate to... lets say... 90%
What do you think significantly HIGHER taxes would do to corporations?
Do your taxes affect you?

　
The smoke and mirrors is this lame theory that if corporate taxes were lower jobs would miraculously return to their original place of origin. They are making too much just from the slave labor camps built in 3rd world hell holes, with tax incentives/breaks/shelters, the consumers pay for! These corporate entities need to be completely cut from the tax system t(*)t, and they need to depend on getting the people they pay $.25 a day to help sustain their company! These companies are no longer American businesses, and shouldn’t be given any special consideration as to the way our tax system works.
　

Quote:

Where do we have slave labor in America?
The average POOR person in America owns a car, and cable tv.
If they are slaves, and poor, how did they afford all this?
I feel inclined to ask this question a second time:
WHERE DO WE HAVE SLAVE LABOR IN AMERICA???

　
Are you serious? Anybody who works a 40 hour a week and is eligible for food stamps or any other government subsidy or welfare program, is not making enough to sustain their existence, are not working for the benefit of themselves. They are slaves to the company. The very purpose of having a job is so an individual isn't dependent on others. Any company (once again mostly corporate entities) That brings in billions annually a cannot pay a descent livable (at least above the poverty line), should not be receiving tax incentives of any kind. They are saving money by creating a further burden on the government and society as a whole.
　
Owning a TV or a car doesn't signify or correlate with any form of wealth, this is exactly the misuse and strangling of statistics to create a reason for the middle class to hate the poor and mislead them away from the facts the rich/elite are giving them the f(*)(*)(*)ing of their lives.

BuckNaked · #84 (**permalink**) 04-20-2009, 07:39 AM

Quote:

FYI, neo-con is not an insult if you believe it is, then you have been mislead.

It means someone who is not a true conservative. Do you really think the heritage foundation are not full of true conservatives?

　
Neo-con artists is not an insult either, it's what he leaders of the republican party have become in the last 30-40 years. And you are exactly right, they are not conservatives in any vague representation of the word, which should be evident from the last republican regime. The Heritage Foundation not only wrote policy for the last 3 republican regimes, they have proven to be a good propaganda machine for the neo-con movement that is not conservative by nature!
　
Cons, says it all, I just add artists because they have been so successful at looting the piggy bank for their own benefit. However dems are now using the neo-cons play book at an accelerated rate for nobodies benefit. That is just dumb!

BuckNaked · #85 (**permalink**) 04-20-2009, 07:45 AM

Quote:

If they are bais, please show how or where, and then refute what they have said. I understand you don't like them, but please show me where they are wrong if you can.

　
Did that pages ago, please try and keep up, and if you have something to add please do! I don't hate them, I don't trust them! I also do not trust CNN, Fox Entertainment News, the Huffington report, or anything else that is totally bias towards the extreme for either party! What do you not get? Are you saying they are not bias towards a political party? You do know they helped write policy for 3 of the last 5 presidents from the same party, right??

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Brigitte Gabriel at the Heritage Foundation	camp_steveo	Political Opinions & Beliefs	5	04-03-2009 09:17 AM
Heritage Foundation~ Free pocket Constitution (not spam)	Herkdriver	Off-Topic Chat	12	02-26-2009 12:34 PM
AP story discredits Dems(esp Obama) on McCain 100 years.	DuH2	Current Events	13	03-02-2008 03:07 AM
Despite claims Obama's rise fueled by PAC's and Lobbyists	Rebellion	Current Events	2	08-09-2007 10:16 AM
Clarke Discredits Himself	JP5	Terrorism	43	04-02-2004 01:30 PM