As predicted: On the job training at White House

[sinophile]

I am a big believer in the "broken windows (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fixing_Broken_Windows)" theory of management... applied not just to policing, but to business and governance in general. On that score it appears the Obama administration is showing troubling signs of incompetence at a time when small victories and small measures of confidence make a real difference.

SecState: More gaffes following snubs of Eastern Europe and UK.
article (http://www.*******.com/article/worldNews/idUSTRE5253XS20090306?sp=true):
BRUSSELS (*******) - Hillary Clinton raised eyebrows on her first visit to Europe as secretary of state when she mis****ounced her EU counterparts' names and claimed U.S. democracy was older than Europe's.

article (http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=CNG.9ca28ad2530b0d0029e1304762eca18f.8c1&show_article=1)
Russian media has been poking fun at US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton after she gave her Russian counterpart a "reset" button with an ironic misspelling.

Treasury: Moving deck chairs while the Titanic continues to sink
WASHINGTON (AFP (http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5hipMqzBSZyHnSvFJPj5F_x94tkGw)) — Two top US Treasury candidates have withdrawn from consideration, as Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner's struggles to build up his staff amid the financial crisis, US media reported.

"There is absolutely no doubt in my mind that President Obama's policy agenda is a factor in driving down the Dow," economic policy strategist Cesar Conda wrote last week in his Politico blog.

White House: Signs of an inability to postpone arguably worthy agendas, policies and programs for the time when there is bandwidth to pay for and advance them.
article (http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5hzxMIm4EJQJddvV_ZHPkN1pw8nJwD96P7RC80)
And while his personal popularity remains high, some economists and lawmakers are beginning to question whether Obama's agenda of increased government activism is helping, or hurting, by sowing uncertainty among businesses, investors and consumers that could prolong the recession.

article (http://www.boston.com/news/nation/washington/articles/2009/02/27/vacancies_abound_in_crucial_us_posts/)
Only about 70 people have been formally nominated to fill the roughly 500 senior posts in the Defense, State, Treasury, and Education departments and dozens of other government agencies, according to White House records.

[California Joe]

I'd think after the last 8 years, they'd all be used to massive amounts of "mis****ouncification".

[budgie]

As for "on the job training" all first-term leaders - no matter how experienced in other branches - have to learn the ropes as they go to an extent. After all, they've never been POTUS before have they? The one exception was probably W, who only had to shut up and do what Cheney told him.

[commanding]

As for "on the job training" all first-term leaders - no matter how experienced in other branches - have to learn the ropes as they go to an extent. After all, they've never been POTUS before have they? The one exception was probably W, who only had to shut up and do what Cheney told him.

I really wasn't aware that President Bush took all his orders from the VP during those 8 years.

[toad]

Have some patience with the new administration. Thier kind of elitest hobnobbing takes time to trickle down to the cabinet, the advisors and thier staffs.

Soon the rest of the world will learn that you do not second guess O, or judge his policy. The media will form ranks and protect Dear Leader.


http://img365.imageshack.us/img365/8128/snob.jpg

[seraosha]

Having a rough first term being compassionately excused apparently doesn't count for our previous President...whom it is easy to say had the roughest start that any POTUS since Washington faced. Oh wait, our current leader has had to stare down his press cadre through a teleprompter, oh the horror.

[2Sheds_Jackson]

As for "on the job training" all first-term leaders - no matter how experienced in other branches - have to learn the ropes as they go to an extent. After all, they've never been POTUS before have they? The one exception was probably W, who only had to shut up and do what Cheney told him.

Ah well then that explains your double standard. Carry on.

[Gordon]

I'd think after the last 8 years, they'd all be used to massive amounts of "mis****ouncification".

Considering the incoming administration's campaign message I guess they were hoping that would change, oh well ...

[Andreas]

I'd think after the last 8 years, they'd all be used to massive amounts of "mis****ouncification".

Thats some truthiness right thurr...

[Walter Sobchak]

Only about 70 people have been formally nominated to fill the roughly 500 senior posts in the Defense, State, Treasury, and Education departments and dozens of other government agencies, according to White House records.

It's hard to find that many ACORN members who can read, write and won't steal the plates off the wall switches!


As for "on the job training" all first-term leaders - no matter how experienced in other branches - have to learn the ropes as they go to an extent. After all, they've never been POTUS before have they? The one exception was probably W, who only had to shut up and do what Cheney told him.

I guess you still have that old Air America chip in your brain.

Of course, if that were the case, Obama would be safe, because Joe Biden makes George W. look like a Rhodes Scholar... but one not named "Clinton".

Here's vintage "Slow Joe" wowing Katie "How does my hair look?" Couric:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EHEvuVE2MPQ&feature=related

and a cornucopia of old Joe...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZXrsOe2spDE&NR=1

[name already taken]

I really wasn't aware that President Bush took all his orders from the VP during those 8 years.
Mostly from Karl Rove... And from his base, the have mores who bankrupted the system. How proud they must feel.

[name already taken]

Have some patience with the new administration. Thier kind of elitest hobnobbing takes time to trickle down to the cabinet, the advisors and thier staffs.

Soon the rest of the world will learn that you do not second guess O, or judge his policy. The media will form ranks and protect Dear Leader.


http://img365.imageshack.us/img365/8128/snob.jpg
Should elect a President who goes to Wall Mart and watches tv all day. This way everybody will be equal.

[Bia]

the have mores who bankrupted the system. How proud they must feel.

/thumbsup.

[Kit]

I really don't care if someone, misspoke, mis****ounced, or farted at the wrong time (though that would be funny). I care about actions and results. That's one thing I can't stand about the media these days. Half of their time they're concerned about pointing out someone's wardrobe and accent, and convince the public that a silly dialect is worth a damn. Do you have to sound like a New England country club member for the media get off your speaking voice?

So far the Obama administration is only shoveling bills into this inferno of an economy. That's not impressing me, and that's how I'm judging him.

[Fargin]

I really don't care if someone, misspoke, mis****ounced, or farted at the wrong time (though that would be funny). I care about actions and results. That's one thing I can't stand about the media these days. Half of their time they're concerned about pointing out someone's wardrobe and accent, and convince the public that a silly dialect is worth a damn. Do you have to sound like a New England country club member for the media get off your speaking voice?

So far the Obama administration is only shoveling bills into this inferno of an economy. That's not impressing me, and that's how I'm judging him.
If you say you're a plumber, you better be a plumber. And if you say you read papers, you better read the title too. As for impressing you, there's containment and stabilization, hopefully it will only take a couple of years.

[WarDancer]

I'd think after the last 8 years, they'd all be used to massive amounts of "mis****ouncification".

Im still trying to figure out where the extra 6 states in the union are according to "that one".

[khaz]

Mostly from Karl Rove... And from his base, the have mores who bankrupted the system. How proud they must feel.

Put down the kool aid. The do good liberals like Barney frank And Chris Dodd did more to ruin our banking system then did W.

"the have more" yes proof that there is a democrap in the white house as the class warfare and stealing of peoples wealth will intensify.

[sinophile]

If true, this (http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=CNG.4b23a31c3686bc071c5b2ae66b18d1d8.601&show_article=1) is appalling. Rahm Emmanuel is cynically using the economic crises to re-engineer society - conveniently ignoring the massive destruction of wealth taking place safely after he made all his money in investment banking.


US Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner is practically alone on the job, working night and day to cope with the worst economic downturn in decades.
Of the 15 key Treasury Department positions that require Senate confirmation, only one has been filled. Stuart Levey, a leftover from the previous administration, who as under secretary of the treasury for terrorism and financial intelligence, is not central to the crisis management however.

Unemployment figures which revealed Friday that 651,000 jobs were lost in February, showed the recession is running ever deeper, but Geithner, who started work in late January, has no deputy secretary, no under secretaries for international affairs and no deputy under secretaries.

Annette Nazareth, who had been expected to be chosen as deputy secretary -- Geithner's top aide -- has withdrawn her name, the Wall Street Journal reported in its online edition, citing people familiar with the matter.

The former Security Exchange Commission head "withdrew in large part because of the long vetting process" President Barack Obama has put in place to choose members of his government, the daily said.

Geithner's choice for undersecretary for international affairs, Caroline Atkinson, also took her name out of the running, only weeks ahead of the April 2, Group of 20 developed and developing nations summit in London.

To help Geithner on international financial matters, Treasury has provisionally hired Ted Truman, an economist at the Peterson Institute of International Economics in Washington, according to a Treasury official.

Truman was Geithner's assistant at Treasury when he served as under secretary for international affairs in the late 1990s.

The 47-year-old Geithner, a former head of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, was involved with the economic recovery efforts by President George W. Bush, but some experts think his plate may be too full this time.

President Barack Obama's chair of the Council of Economic Advisers, Christina Romer, told CNBC on Friday that Geithner "is putting together a team as fast as he can ... work is going on night and day."

Paul Volcker, former Federal Reserve chairman and now head of the newly formed Economic Recovery Advisory Board, told a February 26 Congress hearing that it was "shameful" Geithner had no assistants.

"He shouldn't be sitting there alone ... it really is an unfortunate situation."

At a Senate Finance Committee hearing Thursday, Senator Tom Carper told Geithner, "obviously, you need help," eliciting from the treasury secretary that he saw his family "less than I would like."

Treasury spokesman Isaac Baker denied there were "vetting problems or delays in the process" for nominees at his department.

"With more than 50 political appointees already hard at work, the department is ahead of staffing levels from previous administrations" in the same time frame, he said, highlighting the "unprecedented level of action to strengthen our economy" already taken by the Treasury Department.

[shhfiles]

Walter Sobchak:
Quote:
Originally Posted by sinophile http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/images/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/showthread.php?p=3973633#post3973633)
Only about 70 people have been formally nominated to fill the roughly 500 senior posts in the Defense, State, Treasury, and Education departments and dozens of other government agencies, according to White House records.

It's hard to find that many ACORN members who can read, write and won't steal the plates off the wall switches
rofl rofl Love it !!!!

[name already taken]

Put down the kool aid. The do good liberals like Barney frank And Chris Dodd did more to ruin our banking system then did W.

"the have more" yes proof that there is a democrap in the white house as the class warfare and stealing of peoples wealth will intensify.
Yes, you should go take a look in this kool aid conspiracy which is presently unfolding in your imagination.

Too much Fox News is taking its toll.

[Bia]

Put down the kool aid. The do good liberals like Barney frank And Chris Dodd did more to ruin our banking system then did W.

"the have more" yes proof that there is a democrap in the white house as the class warfare and stealing of peoples wealth will intensify.I wish I had a wild and unchecked imagination too.

[name already taken]

I wish I had a wild and unchecked imagination too.
Do you live under a rock or what ?

http://www.youtube.com/v/mn4daYJzyls&hl=en&fs=1

[shhfiles]

From Forbes article:
In a recent meeting with the Council on Foreign Relations, Barney Frank--the chair of the House Financial Services Committee and a longtime supporter of Fannie and Freddie--admitted that it had been a mistake to force homeownership on people who could not afford it. Renting, he said, would have been preferable. Now he tells us.
Long-term pressure from Frank and his colleagues to expand home ownership connects government housing policies to both the housing bubble and the poor quality of the mortgages on which it is based. In 1992, Congress gave a new affordable housing "mission" to Fannie and Freddie, and authorized the Department of Housing and Urban Development to define its scope through regulations.

http://www.forbes.com/2009/02/13/housing-bubble-subprime-opinions-contributors_0216_peter_wallison_edward_pinto.html

[malefactor]

Yes, you should go take a look in this kool aid conspiracy which is presently unfolding in your imagination.

Too much Fox News is taking its toll.


Do you some how mean to say that "tax the rich" and give to the poor is not wealth stealing? If you feel sorry for having too much money you give it to the poor and leave my money alone.

If we want equality in taxation then it should be a flat tax. Not a penalty for doing something with your life besides eating bon bons and squeezing out kids.

[khaz]

Yes, you should go take a look in this kool aid conspiracy which is presently unfolding in your imagination.

Too much Fox News is taking its toll.

Did olberman tell you to say that or do u just repeat the dnc talking points that cbs,abc,cbs,cnn,pbs pour into your noggin.

Funny how all the libtards are so afraid of Fox news, if anyone breaks with the liberal news pack they must be eliminated.

[Jobu]

Obama is a naive idiot.

[SoftLion]

I give Obama credit for making specific promises (stimulus will create 4 million jobs, cut deficit in half in first term, etc.), I just think he's wrong.

[Alpheus]

Do you live under a rock or what ?

http://www.youtube.com/v/mn4daYJzyls&hl=en&fs=1

Hey moron, thats the Alfred E. Smith dinner, a fundraising event where the speakers make fun of themselves, their party and the like. Here is McCain and Obama doing the same.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pq4zrOoHXeg

I guess you must live under a very big rock.

[name already taken]

Do you some how mean to say that "tax the rich" and give to the poor is not wealth stealing? If you feel sorry for having too much money you give it to the poor and leave my money alone.

If we want equality in taxation then it should be a flat tax. Not a penalty for doing something with your life besides eating bon bons and squeezing out kids.
You, the poor top 1%, you are suffering so much. It's sad. I feel so very sorry for
all of you.

We should let the rich tax everybody and call this "wealth creation",
instead of listening to those who say they are being fleeced.

[malefactor]

You, the poor top 1%, you are suffering so much. It's sad. I feel so very sorry for
all of you.

We should let the rich tax everybody and call this "wealth creation",
instead of listening to those who say they are being fleeced.

Why does it matter how the "poor top 1%" are doing? It is wealth redistribution if you take an disproportionate amount of our money and give it to anyone. We the 1% still pay more taxes than the middle and lower class. 30% of what I make is more than 30% of the 99% right? Why is it my job to feed the masses? And they wonder why we hide money in Swiss banks?

But I guess the guilt ridden left just doesn't understand that. It's socialism or nothing right?

[sinophile]

You, the poor top 1%, you are suffering so much. It's sad. I feel so very sorry for all of you. We should let the rich tax everybody and call this "wealth creation", instead of listening to those who say they are being fleeced.

If you can suspend your resentment of folks wealthier than you for a minute, please consider a few facts:

Fact - many businesses incorporate and relocate where they can get the best tax benefit. So do some individuals. Both jobs and tax revenues can be lost by a punitive tax policy.

Fact - businesses decide on investing in people and ideas based on after-tax returns. Poorly conceived tax policy can kill investment.

Fact - Obama's proposed tax increase is not just an increase of 4%. After the loss of itemized deductions, increases in state and local taxes, and other changes to the tax code - it could equal as much as a 60% effective tax rate from some individuals in some cities (New York City being the current popular example).

Fact - Capital and job flight does happen when taxes are increased beyond a certain threshold. What that threshold may be will be tested in the months and years to come.

You're angry... I get it. But think it through. I know enough wealthy people to know the response to this policy (if not moderated by Congress) will be years of economic flu for the US, and near disaster for California and New York.

[name already taken]

Why does it matter how the "poor top 1%" are doing? It is wealth redistribution if you take an disproportionate amount of our money and give it to anyone. We the 1% still pay more taxes than the middle and lower class. 30% of what I make is more than 30% of the 99% right? Why is it my job to feed the masses? And they wonder why we hide money in Swiss banks?

But I guess the guilt ridden left just doesn't understand that. It's socialism or nothing right?
I wonder where all of you take your information from. Well, not really... It
comes from your imagination. Of course. Where else?

[name already taken]

If you can suspend your resentment of folks wealthier than you for a minute, please consider a few facts:

Fact - many businesses incorporate and relocate where they can get the best tax benefit. So do some individuals. Both jobs and tax revenues can be lost by a punitive tax policy.

Fact - businesses decide on investing in people and ideas based on after-tax returns. Poorly conceived tax policy can kill investment.

Fact - Obama's proposed tax increase is not just an increase of 4%. After the loss of itemized deductions, increases in state and local taxes, and other changes to the tax code - it could equal as much as a 60% effective tax rate from some individuals in some cities (New York City being the current popular example).

Fact - Capital and job flight does happen when taxes are increased beyond a certain threshold. What that threshold may be will be tested in the months and years to come.

You're angry... I get it. But think it through. I know enough wealthy people to know the response to this policy (if not moderated by Congress) will be years of economic flu for the US, and near disaster for California and New York.
Kool-Aid for high school students. You get an 'A'.

Happy ?

[malefactor]

I wonder where all of you take your information from. Well, not really... It
comes from your imagination. Of course. Where else?


Imagination, it seems to be all you have. Since there is a disturbing lack of evidence to support you theories.

One would also surmise that you may be on the receiving end of this redistribution and therefore very against the idea of losing that "wealth creation". It's ok, it doesn't make you a bad person, just a socialist.

Living off the hard work of others, whether an entrepreneur or someone who inherited their money, is taking from someone along the line who worked hard or smart for what they have. I think they call it capitalism, quite different from your socialism.

[firemedic]

Obama and the rest of his ilk have no clue what socialism really is. There version of "socialism" is more like feudalism: everyone equally broke and a huge Govt. to bow down to.:roll:

[sinophile]

Kool-Aid for high school students. You get an 'A'.

Happy ?

You busted me. I know this proposed tax policy is going to terrific for businesses and jobs in America. I'm issuing a PO for 10,000 red "I Redistributed" T-Shirts from my Chinese factory tomorrow.

[commanding]

I give Obama credit for making specific promises (stimulus will create 4 million jobs, cut deficit in half in first term, etc.), I just think he's wrong.

Maybe he is having cocaine flashbacks? He admits he did coke back when.

[firemedic]

Regardless of whether he does a good job or not the liberal left, pop culture, left biased media, and the influential hollywood/entertainment elite in this country will not allow our nations first "Blackberry president" to fail. The young and disenfranchised youth of America just want as much as possible and want to do as little as possible to attain success. This is the guy who will give the welfare parasites everything they want and their too naive and lazy to think outside the box, and if a white conservative dares say anything critical of the "messiah" then they must be racist. Give me a break. This makes me sick.

[name already taken]

You busted me. I know this proposed tax policy is going to terrific for businesses and jobs in America. I'm issuing a PO for 10,000 red "I Redistributed" T-Shirts from my Chinese factory tomorrow.
Those businesses are all nearly bankrupt before Obama's policies take effect.

All by themselves. They or those who speak for them are in no position to give lessons to anybody.

Period.

[Alpheus]

Kool-Aid for high school students. You get an 'A'.

Happy ?

Nice response. Rather than argue with his argument or facts, or present anything substantive of your own, you just insult him.
Why don't you bow out of this thread before you make yourself look like a completely brainwashed obamatron.

Oh, too late.

[sinophile]

http://s5.tinypic.com/k3lued.jpg

[Alpheus]

^^^ Nice. Do they ship to Canada?

[Mastermind]

Yeah...I notice the Chairman had Wikipedia clean all critical remarks off the Obama page. Sound familair? yeah...like Maoist? Like Stalinist? And he wants to dispell any idea that he is a flaming socialist commie rat.

[SoftLion]

Those businesses are all nearly bankrupt before Obama's policies take effect.

All by themselves. They or those who speak for them are in no position to give lessons to anybody.

Period.

So what's your point - when Obama's tax policies take effect it won't matter because "those businesses are all nearly bankrupt" anyway, "all by themselves"?

[khaz]

The U.S. Income Tax Burden:
An Analysis of Congressional Budget Office (CBO) Numbers
by Sugi Sorensen and Stephen Cobb
Last Revised: 17-Apr-2000
Back to Sugi's Home Page


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Table of Contents:
Introduction
Who Pays Income Taxes?
How to Interpret These Numbers...
The Federal Tax Burden...
Who is in These Income Brackets?
How Much Do They Make?
How Much Wealth Do They Have?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Introduction
Below is an analysis of Congressional Budget Office (CB0) report entitled "Preliminary Estimates of Effective Tax Rates" (07-Sep-1999). The raw numbers can be scrutinized here:
http://www.cbo.gov/showdoc.cfm?index=1545&from=4&sequence=0
All I did was try to make heads or tails of the data by plotting it and extracting the most salient data. The Income Tax Burden is defined simply as who pays U.S. income taxes in the form of individual and corporate income taxes, payroll taxes, and federal excise taxes. Based on this information, the following conclusions clearly emerge:
An enormous percentage of taxes are payed by a minority of Americans:
The Top 1% of taxpayers pay 29% of all taxes.
The Top 5% of taxpayers pay 50% of all taxes.
Our tax system is not so much progressive as it is confiscatory -- Frederic Bastiat called this phenomenon "legal plunder." A progressive tax is based on the premise that those with more income can afford to pay more taxes, and conversely, those with little or no income should pay no tax. However, a quick look at Graph 1A below shows that the U.S. tax system has become far beyond progressive. Fully half the taxpayers contribute almost nothing in individual income taxes.
The Top 1% of income earners (comprising about 1 million families) earn about 15% of the total income earned by all wage earners in the United States, yet they pay almost 30% of all individual income taxes.
Furthermore, the Top 1% are shouldering a roughly 50% higher proportion of the overall income tax burden than they did in 1977.
The argument most oft used against tax breaks are that they benefit only the wealthy. It is clear from even a cursory look at the numbers below that the 'wealthy' will receive the majority of any income tax reduction because they pay a disproportionately huge percentage of the income taxes! To structure a tax break such that those in upper income brackets are excluded would constitute nothing more than transfer of wealth from those who have it to those who don't (i.e. legal plunder.)



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Who Pays Income Taxes?

Cumulative Percentage of Individual Income Tax Paid
(1999 Estimated)


And thats 2000, worse now Thank you comrade obama.

[malefactor]

The U.S. Income Tax Burden:
An Analysis of Congressional Budget Office (CBO) Numbers
by Sugi Sorensen and Stephen Cobb
Last Revised: 17-Apr-2000
Back to Sugi's Home Page


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Table of Contents:
Introduction
Who Pays Income Taxes?
How to Interpret These Numbers...
The Federal Tax Burden...
Who is in These Income Brackets?
How Much Do They Make?
How Much Wealth Do They Have?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Introduction
Below is an analysis of Congressional Budget Office (CB0) report entitled "Preliminary Estimates of Effective Tax Rates" (07-Sep-1999). The raw numbers can be scrutinized here:
http://www.cbo.gov/showdoc.cfm?index=1545&from=4&sequence=0
All I did was try to make heads or tails of the data by plotting it and extracting the most salient data. The Income Tax Burden is defined simply as who pays U.S. income taxes in the form of individual and corporate income taxes, payroll taxes, and federal excise taxes. Based on this information, the following conclusions clearly emerge:
An enormous percentage of taxes are payed by a minority of Americans:
The Top 1% of taxpayers pay 29% of all taxes.
The Top 5% of taxpayers pay 50% of all taxes.
Our tax system is not so much progressive as it is confiscatory -- Frederic Bastiat called this phenomenon "legal plunder." A progressive tax is based on the premise that those with more income can afford to pay more taxes, and conversely, those with little or no income should pay no tax. However, a quick look at Graph 1A below shows that the U.S. tax system has become far beyond progressive. Fully half the taxpayers contribute almost nothing in individual income taxes.
The Top 1% of income earners (comprising about 1 million families) earn about 15% of the total income earned by all wage earners in the United States, yet they pay almost 30% of all individual income taxes.
Furthermore, the Top 1% are shouldering a roughly 50% higher proportion of the overall income tax burden than they did in 1977.
The argument most oft used against tax breaks are that they benefit only the wealthy. It is clear from even a cursory look at the numbers below that the 'wealthy' will receive the majority of any income tax reduction because they pay a disproportionately huge percentage of the income taxes! To structure a tax break such that those in upper income brackets are excluded would constitute nothing more than transfer of wealth from those who have it to those who don't (i.e. legal plunder.)



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Who Pays Income Taxes?

Cumulative Percentage of Individual Income Tax Paid
(1999 Estimated)


And thats 2000, worse now Thank you comrade obama.

Very nice, kudos.

[name already taken]

http://img21.imageshack.us/img21/7920/wealth.gif (http://sociology.ucsc.edu/whorulesamerica/power/wealth.html)
Who Rules America? (http://sociology.ucsc.edu/whorulesamerica/power/wealth.html)

[malefactor]

http://img21.imageshack.us/img21/7920/wealth.gif (http://sociology.ucsc.edu/whorulesamerica/power/wealth.html)
Who Rules America? (http://sociology.ucsc.edu/whorulesamerica/power/wealth.html)



So if they are paying their share of the taxes, why raise them? Oh because they ought to be able to keep the welfare lines running indefinitely right?

[name already taken]

So if they are paying their share of the taxes, why raise them? Oh because they ought to be able to keep the welfare lines running indefinitely right?
Where are the welfare lines in United states ? The welfare lines in USA are oriented in the direction of the rich.

Social redistribution in USA is redistribution of wealth to the rich. The figures above are based on figures of 2001, and especially in the last 8 years, these figures improved very much in favor of the top 5%.

In 2110 49% of American Wealth belonged to the top 5%. Now it's more than 49%.

They pay 50% of the taxes. I am very sorry, but they're the only ones who can afford to pay taxes. The bottom 80% with 16% of the net worth certainly can't afford to pay much taxes.

The 16% of the USA net worth owned by the bottom 80% is what the top 5% let them own, the bread crumbs falling from their table.

Income inequality like this doesn't have any future.

You should do your homework, I'm tired of doing it for you.

[Macs.]

Obama gets automobile origin wrong

President Obama (http://washingtontimes.com/themes/?Theme=Barack+Obama) misspoke Tuesday night when he credited the U.S. with the invention of the automobile as part of his call for investing in the industry.

"I believe the nation that invented the automobile cannot walk away from it," Mr. Obama said in his address to a joint session of Congress."

But the Library of Congress says, while noting that the issue is complicated, that the honor should go to Karl Friedrich Benz of Germany, who in 1886 received the first patent for what the Library calls the "first true automobile" -- a gasoline-powered engine attached to a three-wheeled vehicle.

Other claimants include French and Scottish inventors, who had created vehicles with engines powered by steam or electricity well before Benz.

The first American inventor was George Baldwin Selden, who in 1895 patented a gasoline-powered internal combustion engine with a carriage. The first successful gas-powered car was built in 1893 by the Duryea brothers, who the Library of Congress said set up the first American car-manufacturing company.
http://washingtontimes.com/news/2009/feb/25/obama-gets-origin-of-automobile-wrong/

[malefactor]

Where are the welfare lines in United states ? The welfare lines in USA are oriented in the direction of the rich.

Social redistribution in USA is redistribution of wealth to the rich. The figures above are based on figures of 2001, and especially in the last 8 years, these figures improved very much in favor of the top 5%.

In 2110 49% of American Wealth belonged to the top 5%. Now it's more than 49%.

They pay 50% of the taxes. I am very sorry, but they're the only ones who can afford to pay taxes. The bottom 80% with 16% of the net worth certainly can't afford to pay much taxes.

The 16% of the USA net worth owned by the bottom 80% is what the top 5% let them own, the bread crumbs falling from their table.

Income inequality like this doesn't have much future. Except entering in the third world.

You should do your homework, I'm tired of doing it for you.

I don't guess you're doing my homework so much as proving my point. The top percentage is rich, and getting richer each year. That's called investing,
diversifying finding new markets. We don't ask the bottom to give up their money to our coffers.

And from your own statements you are fine with the entire principle...

I think it would be lovely if you invented something the world could not live without and under the new tax structure, instead of getting rich, you payed 60% of your earnings to the have-nots. And not just to the have-nots, but to the people who could care less about even trying.

That would be justice.

You're almost right about the welfare lines and the rich, kind of. They might as well start them outside our houses. The money is coming directly out of our pockets.

[Atlantic Friend]

"I have never understood multiparty democracy."

This one at least is worth its weight in Bushisms.

The part about American democracy having been around a lot longer than European democracy is just icing on that yummy cake.

[name already taken]

I don't guess you're doing my homework so much as proving my point. The top percentage is rich, and getting richer each year. That's called investing,
diversifying finding new markets. We don't ask the bottom to give up their money to our coffers.

And from your own statements you are fine with the entire principle...

I think it would be lovely if you invented something the world could not live without and under the new tax structure, instead of getting rich, you payed 60% of your earnings to the have-nots. And not just to the have-nots, but to the people who could care less about even trying.

That would be justice.

You're almost right about the welfare lines and the rich, kind of. They might as well start them outside our houses. The money is coming directly out of our pockets.
The rich having to ask for justice ?

When they have all the best lawyers ?

If they can not get something back from what they invent, they just can not invent at all. That's it.

The American people was great when the tax levels to everybody and especially to the wealthy and the corporations were much higher than today.

Prosperity is not a matter of tax levels. It's a matter of where the resources are invested.

Luxury for the very few, or infrastructure for the future of everyone.

You're choosing luxury for the very few. Social redistribution to the rich and trickle down economics.

That means bankruptcy for everybody in the next few years.

What I say is 'what' are the resources are invested in is what is important.
What you say is 'by whom' the resources are invested is what is important.

There is no relation

[malefactor]

What I say is 'what' are the resources are invested in is what is important.
What you say is 'by whom' the resources are invested is what is important.

There is no relation

In this you are correct. Both are important and our left wing government has shown that it would rather pork barrel us to death with things like condoms and Pelosi's mouse than use it to help and to build infrastructure.

They are not using what they already have responsibly, yet you and they, just want to take more of my money to help very little and waste even more. We have never generated more tax revenue than we do today and we have always made it through. The government has never wasted more than we do today, that's the difference.

[name already taken]

In this you are correct. Both are important and our left wing government has shown that it would rather pork barrel us to death with things like condoms and Pelosi's mouse than use it to help and to build infrastructure.

They are not using what they already have responsibly, yet you and they, just want to take more of my money to help very little and waste even more. We have never generated more tax revenue than we do today and we have always made it through. The government has never wasted more than we do today, that's the difference.
They've been in office for less than 2 months.

The talking points are ready. The rivers of kool aid are flowing...
This is what the wealth redistribution lines to the rich are invested in.
Inventing talking points... What a mission!

Maybe USA is corrupt beyond repair. We'll see...

[malefactor]

They've been in office for less than 2 months.

The talking points are ready. The rivers of kool aid are flowing...
This is what the wealth redistribution lines to the rich are invested in.
Inventing talking points... What a mission!

Maybe USA is corrupt beyond repair. We'll see...


I think Chavez has room on his staff for you. Forcing farmers to grow rice for cheap instead of making the profit they should be able to. It's the same thing. Why do I want to work my ass off to make money if all I get in return is more taxes.

Way to stimulate invention and growth.

[name already taken]

I think Chavez has room on his staff for you. Forcing farmers to grow rice for cheap instead of making the profit they should be able to. It's the same thing. Why do I want to work my ass off to make money if all I get in return is more taxes.

Way to stimulate invention and growth.
The way invention and growth has lately been done in USA resulted in world economic depression.

But that's not important. What's important is that you have a very good talking point here.

You should make an infomercial with it. The world could not be without such a nice creation for sure.

God Bless America!

[commanding]

Yeah...I notice the Chairman had Wikipedia clean all critical remarks off the Obama page. Sound familair? yeah...like Maoist? Like Stalinist? And he wants to dispell any idea that he is a flaming socialist commie rat.

I also saw that info....the info said the remarks added to the Wikipedia Obama page were removed within 2 minutes. someone must be working on keeping that page in line with the democratic mantra at a 24/7 pace.

[malefactor]

The way invention and growth has lately been done in USA resulted in world economic depression.

But that's not important. You have a very good talking point here.

You should make an infomercial with it. The world could be without such a nice creation for sure.

God Bless America!


People making money off of it has got to stop! Tax hard work more that will encourage it!

Less work more taxes, your way of thinking is what is killing this country. Screw the small business with ideas, tax them out of business.

[Jobu]

Nearly every time Obama opens his mouth attacking Wall Street your 401k loses money.

[Mastermind]

Yep...down the drain. This can not be accidental ignorance on Obama's part. He is not overly bright. I came to that conclusion when I listend to him speak without a teleprompter. Really, the guy is a well handled pupet. But, he has some degrees of sophistication in that he has checked himself and his VP several times when improper or ill-timed utterances have come out. So...it must be concluded he has an agenda and that agenda must be in full compliance with his socialist training and his personal communist leaning philosophy. People will be stunned as each of his socialist programs come forward and are grudgingly accepted by the socialist led congress. Nothing but a massive national disaster can stop this now. The useful idiots have outnumbered freedom loving people at the polls. The reaper comes. Those about to be reaped are well deserving of it.

[sinophile]

Excerpt from Warren Buffet's appearance on CNBC (http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/clusterstock/~3/19xjzlDsbTQ/buffett-breakfast-on-cnbc-transcript-2009-3)today, relevant to this thread:



KERNEN: I want to--you just said something interesting, Mr. Buffett, and
that is it depends on the wisdom of our policies. And I understand, you
know, in a time of war everyone rallying behind the commander and chief.
But, obviously, there are differences on what the wisdom of our polices
should be from here on out. Now, the "loyal opposition" is going to be
about, as it's called, will be behind the president, but certainly you
could see that if we--if people think there's some wrong-minded policies
that are being rushed into law at this point because of the crisis, I
mean, that's--it's the loyal opposition's duty to say what they feel,
right?

Mr. BUFFETT: Right. And, Joe, it--if you're in a war, and we really are
on an economic war, there's a obligation to the majority to behave in
ways that don't go around inflaming the minority. If on December 8th
when--maybe it's December 7th, when Roosevelt convened Congress to have
a vote on the war, he didn't say, `I'm throwing in about 10 of my pet
projects,' and you didn't have congress people putting on 8,000 earmarks
onto the declaration of war in 1941.

[firemedic]

Who do you think creates jobs in this country? the EVIL RICH! thats who. Good luck finding a job working for a poor person. Question: how long do you think it will take before someone buys up the pieces of GM after it goes belly up?. Capitalism doesn't rely on Govt. to keep it running. The very nature of a free market economy is self sustaining with periods of ups and downs. If people would just give it time this would recover but the quasi socialist Dems cant let this opportunity for a power play slide. This is sad.

[zg18]

Who do you think creates jobs in this country? the EVIL RICH! thats who. Good luck finding a job working for a poor person. Question: how long do you think it will take before someone buys up the pieces of GM after it goes belly up?. Capitalism doesn't rely on Govt. to keep it running. The very nature of a free market economy is self sustaining with periods of ups and downs. If people would just give it time this would recover but the quasi socialist Dems cant let this opportunity for a power play slide. This is sad.

I'm no economic expert but i believe that there needs to be a certain government control over economy ,there needs to be a state management , i'm not sure if i will put a good example but Russia pulled out of disarray mostly by good state management ,that doesn't mean that free market shoudn't exist au contraire , Russian state is being strongly pressured to nationalize and to put more assets into oligarch companies but Putin told them "fu*k off" , USA should look whow other countries solved their problems, government managment doesn't equals socialism.

my 2 cents

[Mastermind]

Next time you think of state control, think of Keating...think of Charles Rangle...Think of people like Jessie Jackson pulling the strings of your politicians who are running state control...think of this gargantuan mess cauded by Congressmen like Barney Frank and his sweet deals at Freddy and Fanny Mac...and then, at last, think of Uncle Joe Stalin...that's state control.

[sinophile]

I'm no economic expert but i believe that there needs to be a certain government control over economy...

100% agree. Government ought to perform law enforcement, anti-trust and systemic risk management functions. Its when they include social policy in the mix the market breaks down.

I recall a friend whose job was to push for loans in low-income housing areas at a bank. The bank wasn't too keen on the project but the government had mandated it. All the while other banks were - without government support - courting minority communities and making a ton catering to their specific needs. If there's a buck to be made it will happen without government mandates.