466 replies to this topic

[Pht]

Constati, on 15 August 2012 - 11:44 AM, said:

I think that Pres.Obama is a marxist and his policies show it.

Actually, he has pretty much come out in the open and admitted it, to anyone paying attention to his speech at osowatami kansas.

Quote

... our constitution, and capitalist system

Our constitution, which is being wholesale ignored anymore... and we are, sadly, already a socialist republic, and have been so for a while. We already steal ... excuse me, "transfer" at least 50% of tax revenues in wealth thef... pardon, "redistribution." America, what was right about it as founded, only exists in certain areas; and certianly not in W.D.C.

By the way. It's not capitalism. That's marx's insulting name. Call it what it should be called: free (uncoerced) markets.

[Constati]

SakuranoSenshi, on 15 August 2012 - 11:50 AM, said:

Umm, no. I mean this in the nicest possibly way but... you have absolutely no idea.

Ok then provided me with some useful knowledge wise one.

[process]

Constati, on 15 August 2012 - 11:44 AM, said:

I think that Pres.Obama is a marxist and his policies show it. The fastest route to a socialist state is through health care. Once they (government) is paying for your health care they will feel that they can now dictate any activity that could possible affect your health.
Obama knows this and that is why Obamacare was so important to him. He had said it numerous times that he wants to fundamental change the US and he means it.

He hates the United States as it was founded. He is the worst president ever, Wilson being a close second. Progressives can't stand having people make decisions for themselves. How do you all feel paying taxes while half the population pays nothing. And then live on unemployment for TWO YEARS while the rest of us have to work.
And his treatment of the US military, which he also despises.

Basically he hates and wants to destroy everything great about this nation. Freedom, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness. That last one doesn't mean the government is suppose to ensure you are happy it means in the US you get the chance to be happy an not have some fat government bureaucrat telling what you can do and when you can do it, from cradle to grave.

And those in Europe no offense but your goose has already been cooked by socialism, your all at the brink of bankruptcy (except mybe England, not to mention none of you have been able to compete with the US economically or militarily for 80 years. And for the last 60-70 years we have basically provided your protection.

I am not saying we are better then you I 'am saying that our constitution, and capitalist system (which I hope will survive this disaster of a President) have given us a vastly superior system of government and have provided the opportunity and motivation to succeed and excel in life. Where as your socialist systems kill motivation and fail to reward hard work.

The government doesn't pay for health care; we all do. That's how insurance works, because health costs can surprise you and the costs can be astronomical. That's the whole point of the ACA tax/penalty -- to make sure that everyone chips in. Frankly, I wish we went full single-payer, since I don't like the idea that my health is something that can be profited off of.

And following your reasoning, I suppose Mitten's Massachusetts is the socialistest state of them all.

Pht, on 15 August 2012 - 11:50 AM, said:

Is it?

Advantage in what? Being taxed at a higher percentage? Being taxed in more areas? Paying a higher percentage of taxes than those who fall into lower tax brackets? Being taxed so hard in death and estate taxes that they can't pass on their stuff to their children?

It's hard if not impossible to find a way under the current tax system in which people who fall into the higher brackets have any advantage; the system is built to punish achievement by politicians pushing bigotry against anyone who achieves.

No, the system is built to ensure that those who have profited the most off of it pay their fair share.

Quinn Allard, on 15 August 2012 - 11:53 AM, said:

And you're fine with a Muslim?

I'd rather the POTUS refrain from keeping imaginary friends.

[Pht]

SakuranoSenshi, on 15 August 2012 - 11:56 AM, said:

If you have to ask, it's obvious...

It is? Why? Simply because I disagree with you?

Quote

In order to hide money in offshore accounts or complicated schemes

Which is insanely expensive to do, and the money WILL be taxed once you try and use it, rendering the advantage in the US to be not so great.

There really are no truly functional "tax shelters" inside a tax system like ours; and putting your wealth outside of the system doesn't do you any good if you plan to try and use it inside the system you had to get it out of.

[SakuranoSenshi]

To Constati:

How about I flip that about? You posted that long thing making a lot of claims, show me in what way Obama's policies and political statements of intent are Marxist. That's just a single claim you made, so it should be easy. Ready... steady... go!

Pht, on 15 August 2012 - 12:02 PM, said:

It is? Why? Simply because I disagree with you?

Which is insanely expensive to do, and the money WILL be taxed once you try and use it, rendering the advantage in the US to be not so great.

There really are no truly functional "tax shelters" inside a tax system like ours; and putting your wealth outside of the system doesn't do you any good if you plan to try and use it inside the system you had to get it out of.

No, it's obvious because it's obvious. If you cannot see it, I am not sure I can help you, to be honest. It's not insanely expensive at all, there are costs (these places are not charities) but the percentages are small, which is why they are attractive places to put it, in addition to the fact that they will offer varying degrees of anonymity to the depositor. Why do you imagine these institutions exist at all?

Edited by SakuranoSenshi, 15 August 2012 - 12:07 PM.

[Phii Phy Pho Phum]

The Wee Baby Seamus, on 14 August 2012 - 03:44 PM, said:

by that defintion no one can be president, since no one is a natural citizen. except if you vote for howling red lynx, who lies in the ditch with a liver failure.

BRO get over it. The red man lost to whiskey and obvious troll blankets.

[Pht]

process, on 15 August 2012 - 12:01 PM, said:

No, the system is built to ensure that those who have profited the most off of it pay their fair share.

You mean, the poor?

who now are reaping a 10x benefit out of the system? Those in the theft-founded government benefits system are pushing an insane profit margin; at the cost of everyone else.

[BadDreamz]

This thread needs to be closed, it's 10 pages long....lol

I told everyone, if Obama was elected - everyone would have bad credit and be on welfare. This has pretty much happened across the entire country, not only do most the people have bad credit - the U.S. credit rating was even lowered. So give me and this thread a break, Obama sucks elephant sized donkey balls and was not qualified to even manage a Mcdonalds.

[Quinn Allard]

Really, in all honosty, the tax situation doesn't mean didlysquat if where the tax is being spent doesnt get addressed. Solandra, AIG, notsoFederal Reserve Bank, China, Germany, England, Egypt, Syria, Iraq, Afganistan, and it goes on and on. How about this:

Abolish Energy Department.
Abolish IRS, it is now the States problem.
Abolish DHS, we have CIA, FBI, NSA and others
Revamp DOJ
EVERYONE from Obamas cabinet gets fired, people elect heads of office
No more "czars"
All Aliens will be granted Citizenship, requiring them to pay taxes and be put in a Draft system. We goto war, Aliens get Drafted.
Abolish Dept. of Education, it will be States problem.
ReInstall Gold Standard
No more money for foriegn countries, goto the UN for help
No more soldiers deployed on Policing duties
No more helping countries that openly hate us
No more turning over hostile countries to thier own forms of government, you attack us, we occupy you, you are now a US State
The gloves come off, you attack the US or its properties you get the full can of whipass, as in wipped out, brought to your knees, you belong to us now.
Bring back the word TREASON
Legalize Marijuana, they are smoking it anyways, TAX IT
US Citizens must own a handgun......watch crime rates drop
No more Minority Owned Small Business handouts, DO IT YOURSELF
No more government handouts, work programs in place now will be revamped
Beef up our borders, on both sides
Beef up missle defense system
Beef up our long range missle system
Beef up our military (new everything)
Double the size of our Navy and Airforce
Quit this .223 shot to wound bullcrap, everything is higher caliber
Pay rates for military members goes up 30%
The new minority is white males, so no more Minority handouts (we dont need it)
Take the reigns to this country back from epically rich men
For the Poeple, BY the Poeple, you dont win based upon how much money you raised
Must be proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that you are qualified to hold public office
If a country is hiding a war fugitive they are given 72hrs to get that person out, or turn them over, then we send in our men


Noone of this will happen of course, because the men that met on Jeykll Island.

[Felbombling]

Sadly, I think the 24 hour news cycle has totally ruined the U.S. I flew from Vancouver to Palm Springs a few years ago and was watching the Fox News network, and it took me a few minutes to realize it wasn't a comedy show a la the Daily Show with Jon Stewart. Mind you, I don't watch much television. It is interesting how, growing up, your world view changes as more and more information is thrown at you.

[SakuranoSenshi]

^ +1 StaggerCheck. I am out of likes! :-P

[Quinn Allard]

BadDreamz, on 15 August 2012 - 12:15 PM, said:

This thread needs to be closed, it's 10 pages long....lol

I told everyone, if Obama was elected - everyone would have bad credit and be on welfare. This has pretty much happened across the entire country, not only do most the people have bad credit - the U.S. credit rating was even lowered. So give me and this thread a break, Obama sucks elephant sized donkey balls and was not qualified to even manage a Mcdonalds.

Im with ya, I didnt like Obama back in 2007, but I was called a Racist for thinking that a community organizer couldnt lead a country in the middle of a war. Now people are waking up, they are still loopy, havnt woken up completly. Everyone should watch Zeitgeist.

[process]

Pht, on 15 August 2012 - 12:08 PM, said:

You mean, the poor?

who now are reaping a 10x benefit out of the system? Those in the theft-founded government benefits system are pushing an insane profit margin; at the cost of everyone else.

I wouldn't say they've profited, as that would imply they have taken more than they need. The benefits the poor receive are necessities, you know, for their survival and well being.

[process]

StaggerCheck, on 15 August 2012 - 12:21 PM, said:

Sadly, I think the 24 hour news cycle has totally ruined the U.S. I flew from Vancouver to Palm Springs a few years ago and was watching the Fox News network, and it took me a few minutes to realize it wasn't a comedy show a la the Daily Show with Jon Stewart. Mind you, I don't watch much television. It is interesting how, growing up, your world view changes as more and more information is thrown at you.

It astounds me that it's so difficult to report facts; to legislate on facts.

The only thing that's come out of the 24 hour news cycle is speculation, editorial, and emotional appeals. Useless.

[Constati]

SakuranoSenshi, on 15 August 2012 - 12:02 PM, said:

How about I flip that about? You posted that long thing making a lot of claims, show me in what way Obama's policies and political statements of intent are Marxist. That's just a single claim you made, so it should be easy. Ready... steady... go!

First that is funny, and I will say I am not going to convince of my point and your not going to convince of yours. We are on the opposite ends of the political spectrum.

Obamacare is a socialist scheme and from what your telling me you want socialized medicine, if you want a single payer system. I think that it comes down to choice you want to force everyone to "chip in". I would rather have people choose what insurance to buy or not to buy it, and leave the consequence of their decisions to them. So I believe that more competition is the key to better and more affordable insurance. And that does involve profit, but if someone is providing a good service they should be rewarded for their services and that means that they will make more money. And for the last 200 years that is how American has worked.

And I don't agree with what Romney did in Massachusetts. The last thing I want is a government bureaucrat in charge of my health care. Its been tried all over the world, England, Canada, France, Cuba, I don't see Americans flocking to Canada for health care or anywhere else. So why would we want it here? I would rather be able to choose.

Obama's stimulus economics is a another example of socialism which has failed to work 42 months of unemployment above 8% and don't blame Bush this guy has had almost four years and 5 trillon of our money and hasn't fixed anything. Not to mention his friends, Van Jones an avowed communist, Ayers, Rev. Wright, and his dad was a communist. The bailout of the auto industry, which hasn't worked and the taxpayers are on the hook for 25 billion. GM could have filed bankruptcy restructured and come out a better business, instead the US government owns part of a private business I 'a sure the founders never intended that to happen. Oh and the auto workers Union got a huge payoff in that deal for their support.

So thats a start, show where he hasn't leaned socialist in his policies.

Edited by Constati, 15 August 2012 - 12:34 PM.

[Thorgar Wulfson]

pity we cant vote to hang the candidates and get new ones

[Thejusttired]

First of all... you use socialism wrong... speaking about any kind of healthcare... thats not socialist.. that´s SOCIAL.... the opposite of egoistic.

Second... you narrowminded Americans, and for the most part Republicans should really get your eyes out of the friggin bible and across the big blue sea to the east... Learn!!!

just my german 2 cents on that....

btw.. i really hope you get this white dumbass as next president, to finally completely ruin the almost not existent American society.

perhaps things may finally improve after that. Some more partys but two would be nice for the beginning. Pseudo democracy you got there atm..

Edited by Thejusttired, 15 August 2012 - 12:48 PM.

[SakuranoSenshi]

Constati, on 15 August 2012 - 12:33 PM, said:

First that is funny, and I will say I am not going to convince of my point and your not going to convince of yours. We are on the opposite ends of the political spectrum.

Nothing funny about it and we're not, because it's not a spectrum. It's at least two different axes and no US President in 30 years has been anywhere but on the centre of the left-right axis (which is economics). The left of that axis would be what is usually associated with Socialism, as it's a managed economy (no true free market) but actually Socialism is rather more than that and plenty of nations that tend towards Socialism don't have a fully managed market at all.

Socialism and Marxism are not the same thing, not even close. Obamacare as you call it is not a Socialist thing at all, if it were you'd have a proper system along the lines of what the US tends to call "Single Payor". Incidentally, I didn't tell you anything of the sort, I simply correct your blatant ignorance about Marxism. What you believe is irrelevant, we have facts and they're rather inconvenient for you, hint: it's cheaper by far, massively so, to have a single payor system. People with dual US/British citizenship go to the UK all the time to get healthcare, it's a well known thing. Likewise many parts of Canada are notorious for US citizens turning up and taking advantage of their healthcare.

Obama's economics are very centrist, nothing at all like Socialism, which is why I wanted you to spell it out. You're wrong and now you've made a clear statement that is demonstrably wrong, sorry. Incidentally, "saving' various US industries is about the only thing he did right in that regard, banks should probably have been allowed to fall over, they took risks and they lost, they shouldn't get free coverage of bets from taxpayers but injecting money into a viable industry to prevent serious loss of jobs is actually a good idea, both socially and economically.

Your start is very poor, nothing there is Marxist and at a stretch a very little bit could be considered "something a Socialist government or one leaning that way might do" but basically, no.

Edited by SakuranoSenshi, 15 August 2012 - 12:53 PM.

[Constati]

SakuranoSenshi, on 15 August 2012 - 12:52 PM, said:

Nothing funny about it and we're not, because it's not a spectrum. It's at least two different axes and no US President in 30 years has been anywhere but on the centre of the left-right axis (which is economics). The left of that axis would be what is usually associated with Socialism, as it's a managed economy (no true free market) but actually Socialism is rather more than that and plenty of nations that tend towards Socialism don't have a fully managed market at all.

Socialism and Marxism are not the same thing, not even close. Obamacare as you call it is not a Socialist thing at all, if it were you'd have a proper system along the lines of what the US tends to call "Single Payor". Incidentally, I didn't tell you anything of the sort, I simply correct your blatant ignorance about Marxism. What you believe is irrelevant, we have facts and they're rather inconvenient for you, hint: it's cheaper by far, massively so, to have a single payor system. People with dual US/British citizenship go to the UK all the time to get healthcare, it's a well known thing. Likewise many parts of Canada are notorious for US citizens turning up and taking advantage of their healthcare.

Obama's economics are very centrist, nothing at all like Socialism, which is why I wanted you to spell it out. You're wrong and now you've made a clear statement that is demonstrably wrong, sorry. Incidentally, "saving' various US industries is about the only thing he did right in that regard, banks should probably have been allowed to fall over, they took risks and they lost, they shouldn't get free coverage of bets from taxpayers but injecting money into a viable industry to prevent serious loss of jobs is actually a good idea, both socially and economically.

Your start is very poor, nothing there is Marxist and at a stretch a very little bit could be considered "something a Socialist government or one leaning that way might do" but basically, no.

Well as predicted I disagree.

I know that marxism and socialism are different. Thats a given I believe in Obama's heart he is a marxist, but his policies are socialist in nature.

You have a good one I have to go to work.

Edited by Constati, 15 August 2012 - 12:58 PM.

[SakuranoSenshi]

It's not something you can 'disagree' about. Nothing you mentioned is Marxism. Feel free to show us anything he did that is. Until then you're just misusing words which the rest of us actually understand but you don't.

Nothing he has done is Socialist, really, either. The very closest he came was implementing a healthcare system but the model we have ended up with is not what a Socialist society does at all. In fact, there is an argument that you don't need insurance at all in a truly socialist society because private liability doesn't exist, the state covers it all. That's way beyond the bounds of this discussion, though because you clearly have no idea about the actual politics of your nation; Obama is practically indistinguishable from Bush Sr on many matters of policy.

Edited by SakuranoSenshi, 15 August 2012 - 01:02 PM.