I think this video reveals more about Mitt Romney than maybe anything we've seen so far. And the most important thing it reveals? His black and white, simplistic way of thinking. Sir, nothing is as black and white as you make it out to be. How dare you paint millions of your fellow Americans with a broad brush and not think of them as individuals. We are all much more complex than that. And if you can't see it, you do not deserve to get our vote.
Tuesday, September 18, 2012
Speaking of Class Warfare
Now tell me again, just who is practicing class warfare in this campaign?
I think this video reveals more about Mitt Romney than maybe anything we've seen so far. And the most important thing it reveals? His black and white, simplistic way of thinking. Sir, nothing is as black and white as you make it out to be. How dare you paint millions of your fellow Americans with a broad brush and not think of them as individuals. We are all much more complex than that. And if you can't see it, you do not deserve to get our vote.
I think this video reveals more about Mitt Romney than maybe anything we've seen so far. And the most important thing it reveals? His black and white, simplistic way of thinking. Sir, nothing is as black and white as you make it out to be. How dare you paint millions of your fellow Americans with a broad brush and not think of them as individuals. We are all much more complex than that. And if you can't see it, you do not deserve to get our vote.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Well of course if you choose not to vote for Romney you must be on welfare, looking for government handouts. We all know that no one buys into shared responsibility or sees how everyone working together for the greater good can actually have a better outcome than if we all just fended for ourselves. I guess I won't vote for Obama because I pay taxes and am not on welfare so I couldn't possibly care about anyone but myself. Hell, why even have government employment, like the military. If we get attacked, we should be able to defend ourselves since we all should own our own guns. Why even have public schools? Why can't people educate their own damn children at home? Take responsibility, people! In fact, I think Romney would benefit from changing his campaign slogan to "you're on your own". That would be great for America.
ReplyDeleteWhat a jackass.
I have given money to the GOP and I don't even get much. I don't expect anything in return other than for a Romney/Ryan victory and more republicans in office and a better chance of success for everyone.
ReplyDeleteUnder a democratically controlled regime one can't or will have a super hard time making money if they even can. Under a republican regime, startups will be much easier, wealth creation much greater.
Romney's philosophy of government is dead right even if he made significantly more wealth than me in his lifetime. Under his leadership we all do better. Right now the system is the most corrupt and worst it has ever been.
I don't expect handouts from government but I do expect a system that works where you aren't pushed down and someone else pummels their own success off your own back.
The abuses under this regime have been disgusting. We need change.
Anyone who supports Obama is asking for much less in a collective government, worse healthcare, worse ability to rise the financial ladder and is in essense pushing themselves down, not up.
ReplyDeleteVoting for Obama is the worst thing you can do when you are wanting to climb the ladder when you don't have much. In the last 4 years we have seen nothing but the worst economic prospects of our lifetimes.
We need to shrink not grow government. We don't want money going to government thugs, we want the money going to the leaders of private enterprise.
ReplyDeleteObama is a coy salesman but is a super corrupt one.
People have a right to grow enterprise how they see fit, but even if you want to grow a green or socially responsible firm, you do so at your own, not with corrupt government funding like we saw with Solyndra and others.
DeleteI can go on and on about how stupid the comment here against Romney was, because you took a soundbite and twisted the facts.
ReplyDeleteThis was done awhile ago and it was the truth about the way the system works when others are looking on the other side of you determining who to vote for.
I know the real deal, I know what transpired since Obama has been president, I know what others have been doing.
ReplyDeleteRomney was on the right side of history when he made that comment and is still today.
We can't stand 4 more years of Obama's leadership. If you speak and listen to those who are in positions of power, you realize how badly Obama has been for Foreign Policy as of late which has been in my opinion the worst part of the Obama president.
Obama needs to go!
ReplyDeleteEither 1) You are not aware that a single comment can be as long as you want it to be, or 2) You think that by splitting your comment up into an infinite number of them we will somehow believe you are more than one person.
ReplyDeleteEither way, this is known as comment polluting. Please refrain.
Or 3) Drake wants to convince it isn't more than 1 person when it is. After the comment against Romney taken out of context, the possibility of 3) is statistically higher.
ReplyDeleteOf course I know if it is or isn't. It's my blog. I know everything. For your purposes, all you need to do is look at the times of the comments.
DeleteRight now on CSPAN the full mother jones interview is on and your blasting of Romney and taking out soundbites was completely wrong.
ReplyDeleteThe point about the video isn't that anything here is surprising, in fact it isn't, everything he is saying is exactly what I expected and what the right answers are.
I hate the liberals and how they distort the facts.
ReplyDeleteKeep it up. I am this close to deleting you. Final warning.
DeleteDrake, deleting him or her would be a mistake.
ReplyDeleteEducating them is what you should be doing.
A closer examination at that 47% who pay no federal income taxes (mind you, they pay others, like payroll taxes) would show who we're really talking about demographically.
See this: http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/taxtopics/federal-taxes-households.cfm
It provides a breakdown, and is where the 47% figure (it's actually 46.4%) comes from.
Don't censor the uninformed, Drake. Educate them.
And at the end of the day, 7000 millionaires didn't pay federal income taxes either, thanks to various exemptions in the tax code.
ReplyDeleteIn total, 491,000 making over $100,000 paid no federal income taxes.
http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/numbers/displayatab.cfm?DocID=3056
They are clearly dependent victims who refuse to take responsibility for their lives.
And Republican Anon, I'm happy to see your ignorance boils all the way down to Drake (as the owner of the blog) not being able to see your IP address.
Please STOP with the labels "Liberal" - "Conservative": Democrat - Republican. I am an American and BOTH of these parties are responsible for the MESS we are in. NOT one PARTY but BOTH!!
ReplyDeleteThe President until recently, because OBAMA commands by executive order, has NO economic powers. Yes, read the Constitution people. All spending comes from the Congress!
Now:
Republican Regan - Democratic Congress
Republican Bush,Sr. - Democratic Congress
Democrat Clinton - Primarily Republican Congress through the years
Republican Bush, Jr. - Even split for the most part
Democrat Obama - First TWO years Super Majority Democrat
Last TWO - Democrat Senate - Republican House
Now, tell me - How does Regan get all the benefit for economic policies passed by Democrats and how does Clinton get credit for policies passed by Republicans.
What you should be MAD about is how these idiots pass bills into law WITHOUT READING THEM. If they (Republicans and Democrats) do not read them how do they pass them.
Finally on Taxes - Millionaires may escape income TAX, but they pay TAXES like everyone else. I know a lot of lower income people who do not pay taxes either. Why NOT a simple 15% consumption tax - NO income tax - no exemptions. Want to see revenue.
So, go yell at each other about labels - does not matter who is elected because those with the real power are one in the same.
This Country was built with GOD and GUTS. God is gone and we as a people are Gutless. So, watch your football games, American Idol, etc. while they pass the Defense Authorization Act, Re-up the Patriotic Act, illegally use the NSA to spy on all citizens, swindle us out of our money (Solyndra, etc.).
Yeah OBAMA, Yeah Romney. Either way we lose!
You should run for office. I would vote for you in a heartbeat. You echo my sentiments.
DeleteOk - no labels.
ReplyDeleteConsumption taxes disproportionately put more burden on middle and lower income households, thereby decreasing consumption, decreasing demand, sustaining a down economy, and all around making matters worse. One of the main reasons we continue to be in a stagnate economy is because demand is and has been depressed.
And the question then goes to what you would tax in consumption? Would you tax necessities, like food? What about employer-sponsored health care benefits, that are currently not taxed?
Like I said, the problem is demand. And the reason why demand is down is because so many people were laid off from the private sector in 2008-2009. That, and fear of becoming unemployed, basically killed demand for two years. As private companies began adding jobs in 2010, public sector jobs were lost due primarily to lowered local, state, and federal tax revenue. Those recently laid off public sector employees therefore didn't have income to purchase private sector goods, thereby keeping demand low and thereby keeping unemployment at an unsustainable and high level, since private companies wouldn't hire due to lack of demand for their products.
A consumption tax would not help in the long term or the short term for keeping a civilized society (which, mind you, is what taxes are - the price we pay for having a civilized society so we don't fall into chaos).
With a consumption tax, the higher income households would have a significantly lower tax percentage levied against their wages, while the lower incomes would see a higher tax percentage.
Example. The poor spend a larger portion of their income (because no matter what, they'll still have to eat and live somewhere). Imagine if there were *only* a sales tax of 15% on all consumption - everything. Say I make 600k a year, and you make 27k. Of your 27k, a full 15% will be taxed, because you will likely have to spend all of your income to make ends meet. You'll pay a tax rate of 15% on $27,000. I, on the other hand, will spend 250k on my lifestyle, and will keep 350k of untaxed income. Therefore, since I'm only spending 250k rather than my full $600k salary, I'll only be taxed at a rate of 6.25%.
The higher up on the totem pole, the greater the disparity. And since the poor would disproportionately pay more of their income to taxes, they would be likely spend less on things like higher education, propelling the cycle of being poor for generations. Also, I couldn't see them being too happy about being more poor, so you'd probably see crime increase. And, it wouldn't bring in enough revenue to the government to fund our civilized society. There would be even more hard choices to make (like do we try and keep Social Security going, or Medicare, and do we provide health care to returning veterans, do we even have armed forces, what about cops and fireman and ems).
That is why we have a progressive tax code, rather than a regressive one. It's not perfect, but it does allow for society to remain funded without putting too much burden on any individual economic demographic.
Do I think it needs adjustments to deal with the problems we face - yes.
Do I think a consumption tax (or a flat tax) is the answer - no.
The system is built this way, also, so that it encourages people to move up the economic ladder. Example: when I was 15-22 I didn't pay income taxes as I was only working part time jobs or my work study during my undergrad years making less than 10k. After graduation, I got a job, started making some more money, and that first year I paid a marginal rate of @ 5%. Now, after being in the job market for a decade, I pay a rate of roughly 10%. That's because I earn more, but I also have more deductions that lower my tax burden. The main reason I bought my apartment here in Forest Hills, rather than paying rent, was for the tax deduction on the mortgage interest. As my income rises, and less of my mortgage payments go toward interest, my tax burden will decrease.
Sorry, that last line should say my tax burden will increase, not decrease, as my income increases and my deductions decrease.
ReplyDeleteLast anonymous with the tax breakdown, thank you for being so eloquent. Nice to see the voice of educated people on this blog which is sometimes over run with conspiracy theorists. I just wanted to out my two cents in. How does no one remember what happened four years ago when the big three American car manufacturers were about to go under (and would have if not for the bailout essential killing Detroit), banks were failing every week (WAMU, Lehman Bros, etc), the stock marking was taking to below 10,000 and stocks were dirt cheap (citibank was $1 per share). I can't believe people don't think we are better off now than four years ago. We were at the edge of a cliff four years ago. It's not perfect now, no where near but my God it was bad four years ago. It is definitely not like that today.
ReplyDeleteSorry for the typos, I'm on a mobile device.
ReplyDeleteNo problem. I like civil discourse.
ReplyDeleteAnd Drake, for the record, there is a character limit of just under 4100. I hit it on my rant before. No biggie, but you can't Write a comment as long as you want.