Go | New | Find | Notify | Tools | Reply |
Junior Varsity Registered: March 24, 2005 Posts: 652 |
Um, not won out--DOMINATED! |
State Qualifier Registered: March 21, 2005 Posts: 1035 |
You are right, Socialism is great. The best place to see that is in Miami when all of the Cuban exiles are trying to escape from the American capitalists and get back to Cuba where everything is wonderful. On your second point you won't need as much time to prepare after Nancy Pelosi is appointed to the newly created cabinet position, Secretary of Wrestling Rules. We must punish those who work hard so she working on a new scoring system. All of the details aren't complete yet but it will be something like this: If a wrestler is behind or tied then a takedown will count 2 points. If a wrestler is ahead by 1-4 points a takedown will count 1 point. If a wrestler is ahead by 5-10 points a takedown will count 0. If a wrestler is over 10 points ahead a takedown will count as minus 1. It's time we started spreading the wealth in all phases of our lives. Attendance at the state tournament will go down, which is another good thing. Why should we have good crowds when the state tidddly winks tournament is played in front of 78 parents and grandparents? |
Moderator Location: Good Ole USA Registered: October 24, 2002 Posts: 6303 |
My “rant” about guns was a description of Mr. Obama’s endorsements and votes regarding guns which was keeping with the original post of this thread that Mr. Obama has a retarded view of the 2nd Amendment. It was also in regards to your response that read in part “GUNS WILL GO AWAY”, I’m not sure how that qualifies as “never mattered either” it was a part of the conversation from the beginning. You are more than welcome to have your opinion about guns, but the 2nd Amendment guarantees me the individual right to keep them as confirmed by the Heller decision. Mr. Obama’s endorsements and votes clearly show that he does not support the 2nd Amendment to the Constitution of the United States that he will soon be sworn to uphold. I find it extremely difficult to reconcile this paradox. Here’s a real world response to the above quoted comments regarding taxes. I am responsible for 40 people in a manufacturing facility. Our gross sales this fiscal year look to exceed 4.5 million dollars. If our business is taxed more “because we can afford it” we will have less funds to grow our business, make improvements to buildings and equipment, hire more employees and it will definitely impact what I can give our employees in wage increases and/or bonuses. Tell me again how that helps my employees, people who actually work for a living? Those same 40 people are the citizens of a community that will at some point be asked to approve a bond issue to improve school buildings and/or grounds. If their wages have been frozen or increases limited because the company they work for cannot afford increases as a result of additional tax burden how do you think they will vote on said bond issue? How does that decision in turn affect you and your family? |
Junior High Registered: December 06, 2002 Posts: 417 | all i know is i paid over 1/3 of my gross salary in taxes to the federal and state governments last year. If President-elect Obama is going to give me a break, then I am all for it. So lets say I made 30,000. I paid over 10,000 in taxes to help pay for medicare and other government programs. If I am right, doesn't the government distribute medicare funds to those who need it? So basically I am spreading my wealth to help others. Which is fine to me if it isn't abused. |
State Qualifier Registered: March 21, 2005 Posts: 1035 | Theoretically the Social Security benefits, Retirement, Survivor benefits,Disability Income, and Medicare (Health care) aren't spreading the wealth. They are benefits that we purchase by our, and our employer's, contributions to the Social Security system. Medicaid is the welfare program that pays for health care for people with little or no income. I don't think most people mind spreading the wealth for people who are truly in need. I know several people who have children who, through no fault of their own, have developed conditions that will prevent them from every being able to work for a living. If the family had to pay for all of their medical expenses it would bankrupt the family. What bothers me is to follow someone through the checkout counter in a grocery store who uses a food stamps card and then I see them drive away in a Lexus or Cadillac. |
Junior High Registered: September 30, 2004 Posts: 534 | Well Red Rocker, you and I live in different worlds. You don't want your taxes raised for your reasons, and I don't want mine raised. Obama will probably raise yours, and he will probably maintain or lower mine. I see how you can be upset at that with your explination. Frank Ryan, how many of these "people" do you see driving around Lexus's and Cadillacs that use food stamps? Are they 2008 models or 1988 models? We are not going to agree on this issue, so I believe that I will agree to disagree on these issues of socialism, taxes, guns, and the like. If any of you have ever been in real life situations where you have had to use or your parents had to use food stamps, SSI, WIC, or other programs, they can be used to benefit and help people in need. We talk about the bad people that misuse these programs, but what about the ones that actually benefit from them for a short while and then get back on their feet? As a society, we are trained to focus on the negative and take the positive for granted. What about Pell Grants for college? Is that a bad thing too? My young age of 28 must see the world a little differently than some of you on this board. That's okay. I'm sure in a decade or two I might see things a little differently also. Chad Mattox |
Junior High Registered: December 06, 2002 Posts: 417 | I aree with you Frank, but I also grew up with a mother who couldn't afford health insurance because something had to give so she could support her kids (my siblings and I luckily fell under my dads school insurance). Now you see, she had cancer (2 different times which eventially took her life). Yes she remarried and was given insurance through his work, but the problem here is the "pre-existing" condition caused a lot of her treatments, and doctor visits not to be covered. So if you can only imagine the amount of money that was owed. I remember the year I turned 30 (also the year she died), she came down for my birthday, but had to take a cancer treatment shot at our hospital. The price $1000. I am not looking for any sympathy, but what I am trying to say is that there are hundreds of thousands of people like her in America who can't afford health insurance because the cost is outragous, or if they find some, they are not covered because of the pre-existing conditions. WHY can't we change this? We as tax payers are paying the bills anyway (Look at the rising costs of medical treatments, and insurance prices). I think President-elect Obama is onto something, the system needs changed. IMO |