LITEROTICA PODCAST
LIT CAMS (200 Free Tokens)ADULT TOYSVOD MOVIES

not to get political but Obama sucks - empty man at desk

The differences between these two ideas are pronounced. In American life, we vote for almost everything: legislators, judges, commissioners — in some parts of Texas, citizens even elect the person in charge of weights and measures. And yet, although we are happy to accept the results of our elections, we do not regard them as the end of the matter. In a pure representative democracy, our politicians would be accorded almost free rein, their power tempered only by the understanding that they will be removed if they push their luck. In the United States, by contrast, we demand hard limitations. Consider how inappropriate it sounds to suggest that being elected affords one carte blanche. Electoral tampering? “Of course he can cancel the election: A majority wants him to.” Or, perhaps, how odd it feels to hear established individual rights being subjected to the democratic test: A murderer deserves a fair trial in a court of law, with a good chance of getting off on a technicality? “Good luck getting that past the people.”

Rightly, most of us would balk at such objections. And yet, for some reason, this does not temper our ardor for the vote. On the contrary: It is nowadays common to hear it claimed that the opportunity to cast ballots represents the most important of a person’s fundamental rights — the franchise serving as a barometer of civic equality and individual safety. This, I’d propose, is a significant misunderstanding of what it is that has made Anglo-American society so great and so powerful. Democracy is an important component of liberty and of civil society, certainly. But it is just one component — a tool, really.

...

This confusion of process with substance leads us to some strange places. Pro-voting outfits such as “Rock the Vote” and AIGA’s “Get Out the Vote” presuppose that low public participation in a country with democratic input mechanisms is a problem in and of itself — an indictment, perhaps, of an unhealthy political culture. The New York Times’s Charles Blow goes one further, arguing acidically that “voter apathy is a civic abdication.” In his post-midterm press conference, President Obama took this instinct to its extreme, taking the utterly extraordinary step of attempting to divine the intentions of the two-thirds of the country that did not vote at all. Expressing concern that so many had stayed at home, the president first informed the reticent that he had “heard” their silence and then appeared to interpret that reluctance as a form of quasi-supportive criticism. It seems that we are hooked on participation — whether the people participate or not.
Click to expand...
Charles C. W. Cooke, NRO

If winning the vote means carte blanche, does not a smaller voting turnout indicate that in 2012 any Presidential mandate was weakened and diminished?
 
Increasingly, modern American “democracy” represents less a mixed system in which the public is asked for its input into the questions that are up for debate, and more a holistic cult-of-the-collective in which the state is accorded a say in almost all public and private decisions and in which, having handed over their autonomy and their treasure, citizens are asked to vote for the person they believe will manage their lives and property in the manner most agreeable to them. Those among us who are more excited by our own autonomy than by the chance to engage in this process might begin to ask aloud whether we would be better served by having less to do with the affairs of our neighbors and more to do with our own. Who’s with me — can I get a show of hands?
Click to expand...
Charles C. W. Cooke
 
Originally Posted by BobDownSouth View Post
We had a national referendum on this in November 2012.
Your side lost.
Get over it.

He says that like it's something to be proud of. How's it working out for us so far?

Fucking douche nozzle.
 
Isn't it nice that our rulers tell us everything -- eventually? First thing out of the gate after the midterm was Harry Reid's chief of staff briefing the media on how the defeat was all the White House's fault. The president promised support but he never delivered.

I now understand something that had just puzzled me for the last two years. Why was Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) shutting down the Senate by keeping bills passed by the House off the Senate floor and denying anyone a chance to offer amendments? Was the White House calling the shots?

The conventional view is that Reid was a wrecker, cynically shutting down the Senate to help the White House.

But now we learn from Philip Rucker and Robert Costa at the Washington Post that Reid and the White House simply don't get along, and that the relation between the White House and Nancy Pelosi is not to be spoken of.

Reid was not being intransigent and trying to shut down the Republicans. He was just battening down the hatches. Knowing that the White House couldn't lead, and wasn't interested in building coalitions and consensus on proposed big issues, Cap'n Harry just shortened sail down to storm canvas, battened down the hatches, and broke out the rum: Yo ho ho, and a bottle of Koch.

Pity it didn't work, and didn't save the Senate last week. When you are on a lee shore, you need to work the ship up to windward, whatever the cost. Cap'n Harry spent the whole time in the captain's cabin, waiting for the wind to moderate.

Now think of the issues that split the Democrats and unify the Republicans: Keystone XL, private sector growth, Obamacare's war on full-time jobs, mom-and-pop savers fleeced by the Fed, jobs jobs jobs.

Do you see again why it made sense for Majority Leader Reid to shut down the Senate? And why the Democrats had to gin up the war on women and “Hands Up, Don't Shoot!” All the big issues are issues dividing the Democrats, and President Obama is too busy playing golf and raising funds to waste elbow grease on twisting arms in Congress so he could get enough consensus to pass legislation.

Harry Reid did the only thing that made sense to him. He shut down the Senate.

So what does Minority Leader Harry Reid do now? What does any Democrat in the Senate do now? He starts to think about Life After Obama. He considers that Obama is now a lame duck that no longer swings the political weight he possessed just a few months ago. He starts to edge away from a failed project. He sends his chief of staff out to blame the White House for the debacle.

Where there is no vision, the people perish.
Click to expand...
Christopher Chantrill

http://americanthinker.com/articles/2014/11/divided_democrats_on_the_run.html#ixzz3Ilj6jGIr
 
miles said:
Originally Posted by BobDownSouth View Post
We had a national referendum on this in November 2012.
Your side lost.
Get over it.

He says that like it's something to be proud of. How's it working out for us so far?

Fucking douche nozzle.
Click to expand...

כוס אמאכ
:nods:
 
nakedboater69 said:
What are the tax burdens of the poor? I know people that don't work have kids and pay no tax and get $9,000.00 refund on their income tax that they don't pay.:confused:
Click to expand...

This is an incomplete response. For a more complete response, do some digging.

Income tax is not the only form of taxation in America.

Payroll taxes,

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Payroll_tax
Payroll taxes are taxes imposed on employers or employees, and are usually calculated as a percentage of the salaries that employers pay their staff. Payroll taxes generally fall into two categories: deductions from an employee’s wages, and taxes paid by the employer based on the employee's wages.
Click to expand...

include deductions from an employee's wage, examples being medicare, medicaid, and social security deductions.

But they also include the taxes employers pay as a percentage of the salaries they offer as part of their payroll, and anyone with any understanding of how the consumer always gets stuck with the tax bill understands that:

The economic burden of the payroll tax falls on the worker, regardless of whether the tax is remitted by the employer or the employee, as the employers’ share of payroll taxes is passed on to employees in the form of lower wages than would otherwise be paid
Click to expand...

So, just for starters, even the lowest-paid person in the United States, working for an hourly position at the legal minimum wage, pays taxes on their income.

That includes their own welfare burden, and it also includes the massive hit they take on their income that could be theirs if not for payroll taxes.

Right off the bat, the idea that the working poor pay no income taxes is utterly annihilated by the facts.

Now, those workers with excessive amounts of children may in fact be offered refunds which help offset the cost of children.

Is this fair or not? Anyone with children will argue that yes, it is fair. I am personally childless, and I don't agree with absorbing a heavier share of the tax burden because I made fiscally wise decisions in life and others did not, but that's not part of this discussion.

What is part of the discussion is whether or not someone like me, who not just a few years ago was earning the minimum, pays taxes. I definitely did and still do.

But that's just income and payroll burdens, which are one and the same, just categorized separately because complicated things are harder for the average person to understand, and that helps them swallow the regressive taxation which they must endure on their hourly or salaried income.


Sales taxes.

How about sales taxes?

I don't know if you're aware, but the poor spend almost every dime and penny that they earn, and what they spend their money on, almost every single bit of it incurs a sales tax. If we're not talking about rent, or certain other things, the rest of their entire income gets taxed again, because they spend almost all of what they earn immediately.

You see, the poor generally don't get to avoid their share of the burden by funneling money to offshore accounts or using investment tricks to reduce their tax burden, and since they earn so very little and almost all of it ends up going bye-bye due to necessary and unavoidable expenditures, they spend a much, much higher percentage of their income on taxes than the rich do.

Sales taxes are another form of regressive taxation.

But we're not finished. Embedded within sales are other forms of punitive and regressive taxation.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sin_tax

Do you think the poor might sometimes smoke cigarettes or consume alcohol? These items are taxed even more than others, because their manufacturers pay a tax, which ends up getting passed on to the consumer (i.e. poor person) because businesses do not pay taxes. Consumers pay taxes.

If it is a for-profit business, the cost of taxes are shuffled over to whoever purchases the product or service offered. Businesses pay no taxes.

It is simply accounting tricks and different labeling. If the cost is passed onto the consumer, i.e. poor person, then the poor person is paying the tax.

Ta-da.

But we're not done yet.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regressive_tax

An allowance reduction[13] in an income tax system allows for an individual's personal allowance to be withdrawn, making a higher marginal tax for a limited band before returning to the underlying rate. In the UK there is an effective 60% band at £100,000 that returns to 40% at £120,000.[14]

Taxation based on everyday essentials like food (e.g. sales tax, salt tax), clothing (value added tax), transport (fuel tax), energy (carbon tax) and housing (council tax, window tax) is frequently regressive. The income elasticity of demand of food, for example, is usually less than 1 (inelastic) (see Engel's law) and therefore as a household's income rises, even significantly, the tax collected on the food remains almost the same. Therefore, as a proportion of available expenditure, the tax burden falls far more heavily on households with lower incomes.

Certain payroll taxes, such as Social Security in the United States, are considered regressive in that there is a cap so that higher income earners pay a lower proportion of their overall income than lower earning people. [15]However, for people with lower than average earnings, the ratio of the lifetime benefits they receive from Social Security to the lifetime payroll taxes they pay for the program is higher than it is for people with higher average earnings. In that sense, the Social Security system is progressive. For people in the bottom fifth of the earnings distribution, the ratio of benefits to taxes is almost three times as high as it is for those in the top fifth.[16]
Click to expand...

Food, clothing, fuel, energy, housing.

The poor spend a much, much higher percentage of their income on these essential items. But they accumulate hidden taxes all along the way to being passed onto the consumer.

Speaking of housing, what if the poor person rents? He must avoid paying property taxes, those clever, greedy sons of bitches, amirite?

Or wait, rental properties might pay property tax, but they are a business.

And what have we learned so far today?

Businesses pay no taxes. The consumer does.

The person renting is the person providing the income to the business, and any added expenses (such as property taxes) are already included in the rent.

Or, they simply raise the rent.

All part of the business/governmental accounting scheme which exists to hide the costs to the consumer, even as they pay each and every bit of those costs.

And you'd think we'd be done, but nay nay.


Fees and licenses and fines and MANDATORY insurance

You must pay a fee to get a license to drive.

You must pay a fee to register your vehicle.

You must (in many areas) insure the other motorists on the road, even if you leave your own vehicle uninsured, you're not allowed to drive unless you carry minimum insurance policies.

You are now required to have medical insurance or pay a fee every year.

If you are a poor person, chances are, the police sit around in your area and write you traffic tickets for rolling a stop sign, or doing 5 over the speed limit, confident in your inability to fight the ticket.

And, I'm sorry, but 300 dollars to a poor person can break them that month, but it may be all but meaningless to a rich person to be fined that same amount.

Fines and fees and so forth are also regressive forms of taxation, they are typically a set amount, and they are most harmful to the poorest members of our society who can scarcely afford them.

You understand if someone is required by law to carry medical insurance, costing several hundred dollars per month, and they only earn a thousand dollars a month, this represents an immediate 20 or 30 percent income tax, right?

But, of course, medical insurance is just another bill to a rich person. Why aren't those poor people required to buy insurance? I'm a rich motherfucker, I don't understand why the poor don't have an extra several hundred dollars lying around every month. Make them pay it, or fine them, but dear god almighty, don't mandate that their wages increase.

That would be an unimaginable crime. Forcing businesses to pay workers enough to afford their mandatory and unavoidable, government-enforced expenses.

How dare those workers not just be intrinsically rich all on their own. Didn't they inherit a shit ton of money like I did?

Yes indeed. Those poor people get to avoid paying any taxes. Those lucky bastards, I wish I was poor.




Rich fucknuggets like Romney need to shut their fucking whore mouths when they talk about the poor, because they have no common sense or understanding, and it royally pisses me the fuck off when they assume it's easy or that everyone is getting a free ride.

Be a minimum wage worker in America for a while before you open your goddamned mouth.
 
Last edited:
I manage a restaurant, but I used to deliver pizzas.

Now, I have very little college education, and I'm not a professional politician.

I know how to google and I'm aware of my own budgetary concerns.

Why am I insanely smarter than the Republican Rominee of 2014?

I should be way, way dumber than the guy who an entire political party selected to represent them to become the leader of the free world.

If he's going to open his clueless mouth about how 47 percent of Americans pay no taxes, that should IMMEDIATELY DISQUALIFY him from ever holding public office again, because that's the most moronic statement ever uttered by man.

Far from paying no taxes, all poor people ever do when they earn or spend money is pay taxes. That's all they do, all day long, is pay taxes.

And what is left over, after their government-mandated unavoidable expenses, their government-mandated unavoidable income taxes, their government-mandated unavoidable sales taxes, their unavoidable property taxes, communications taxes on phone bills, energy taxes, cable bill embedded fee taxes, licensing taxes, registration taxes, and the food in their stomach and roof over their head, is a pittance.

A very, very, very, very, tiny pittance.

That represents their actual, real, spendable, after-tax, after-mandatory expenses income.

It's not enough to buy the attention of Senators or Congressmen, or governors. So, that is why when blowhards say stupid shit about us, all we can realistically do is vote for their opponent. That is our one and only recourse.

Stop making those people your representatives. Word to the wise: Hire someone who has ever been poor once. Just once. Obviously they're fabulously rich now and no longer care. But, try to work some actual hard life experience into the fucker at one point, and maybe they won't spout fucking imbecilic statements and make absolutely positively certain that poor people won't vote for them.
 
Last edited:
Payroll taxes including the 1/2 your employer pays are ostensibly an "investment" towards your social Security Retirement. That is not part of your Federal income tax even though it comes out of your check and goes to the feds into the general fund where they spend it.

Romney's point is that no one making below a certain threshold pays one dime in Federal income tax, and in fact are often given money from the IRS collected from others in the form of tax credits in excess of the amount paid in for the year. People in that category are not generally open to a sales pitch about lower federal income taxes since they pay negative income taxes. Any tax relief does not hit them because they are already getting "relief" from that particular tax. People in that category understandably do not hate the IRS. IRS is Santa Claus from their point of view.

Sales taxes, Fees and licenses and fines and MANDATORY insurance do not change with a reform of the IRS.

You are absolutely correct that there is an additive effect from all kinds of taxes in every good or service we purchase. Reform of the IRS and especially lowering the corporate tax rate would bring the cost of everything down. Do you really think that (true) line of reasoning will sell to the "tax the evil rich" crowd?
 
query said:
....lowering the corporate tax rate would bring the cost of everything down.
Click to expand...

For being Lit's (self-proclaimed) "Smartest Guy On the General Board", that was an incredibly stupid thing to say. :rolleyes:
 
BobsDownSouth said:
For being Lit's (self-proclaimed) "Smartest Guy On the General Board", that was an incredibly stupid thing to say. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

....because?

No idea?

Thought so..

OK, lil Robbie, I'll play with you; I know how you hate it when the big boys ignore you.

You've taken that exact, same little idiotic swipe on a dozen threads the last few days. Each time in a thread where you clearly have no idea what the grown-ups are talking about.

On none of them did you even attempt to rebut anything I said, and you can't here either. So, piss off, imbecile.

BobsDownSouth said:
NOBODY is as bright as Queerbait! Just ask him! He's the smartest guy on the entire General Board, he's said so numerous times. Numerous times.
Click to expand...

Numerous, huh?

Quote it once.

Your trolling tactic of making up sentiments for others and repeating them to death is well known. Maybe it used to be funny, once.

Since I bothered to reply to you, does that mean you go back to making sexual remarks about my under-aged daughter again?
 
Last edited:
query said:
....because?

No idea?

Thought so..

OK, lil Robbie, I'll play with you; I know how you hate it when the big boys ignore you.

You've taken that exact, same little idiotic swipe on a dozen threads the last few days. Each time in a thread where you clearly have no idea what the grown-ups are talking about.

On none of them did you even attempt to rebut anything I said, and you can't here either. So, piss off, imbecile.
Click to expand...


Well....looks like the Biggest Loser spent ANOTHER all night on the board pontificating and spreading his stupidity. If you had a job, perhaps you woulda slept instead in anticipation of working.


I see you in the dating thread, sex thread and wages thread....three things you couldn't possibly know any less about. Why don't you hang out in the how to maintain a giant beach ball for a head thread? Or start one?

Ok, back to WORK for me!! Have a good day, I'm sure I'll see you here STILL when I get home.


and fuck you miles!!!:kiss:
 
ZiggyTheHutt said:
I manage a restaurant, but I used to deliver pizzas.

Now, I have very little college education, and I'm not a professional politician.

I know how to google and I'm aware of my own budgetary concerns.

Why am I insanely smarter than the Republican Rominee of 2014?

I should be way, way dumber than the guy who an entire political party selected to represent them to become the leader of the free world.

If he's going to open his clueless mouth about how 47 percent of Americans pay no taxes, that should IMMEDIATELY DISQUALIFY him from ever holding public office again, because that's the most moronic statement ever uttered by man.

Far from paying no taxes, all poor people ever do when they earn or spend money is pay taxes. That's all they do, all day long, is pay taxes.

And what is left over, after their government-mandated unavoidable expenses, their government-mandated unavoidable income taxes, their government-mandated unavoidable sales taxes, their unavoidable property taxes, communications taxes on phone bills, energy taxes, cable bill embedded fee taxes, licensing taxes, registration taxes, and the food in their stomach and roof over their head, is a pittance.

A very, very, very, very, tiny pittance.

That represents their actual, real, spendable, after-tax, after-mandatory expenses income.

It's not enough to buy the attention of Senators or Congressmen, or governors. So, that is why when blowhards say stupid shit about us, all we can realistically do is vote for their opponent. That is our one and only recourse.

Stop making those people your representatives. Word to the wise: Hire someone who has ever been poor once. Just once. Obviously they're fabulously rich now and no longer care. But, try to work some actual hard life experience into the fucker at one point, and maybe they won't spout fucking imbecilic statements and make absolutely positively certain that poor people won't vote for them.
Click to expand...
You live in America you have to pay some taxes if you don't like it leave.
 
You shouldn't be allowed to vote or reproduce
ZiggyTheHutt said:
I manage a restaurant, but I used to deliver pizzas.

Now, I have very little college education, and I'm not a professional politician.

I know how to google and I'm aware of my own budgetary concerns.

Why am I insanely smarter than the Republican Rominee of 2014?

I should be way, way dumber than the guy who an entire political party selected to represent them to become the leader of the free world.

If he's going to open his clueless mouth about how 47 percent of Americans pay no taxes, that should IMMEDIATELY DISQUALIFY him from ever holding public office again, because that's the most moronic statement ever uttered by man.

Far from paying no taxes, all poor people ever do when they earn or spend money is pay taxes. That's all they do, all day long, is pay taxes.

And what is left over, after their government-mandated unavoidable expenses, their government-mandated unavoidable income taxes, their government-mandated unavoidable sales taxes, their unavoidable property taxes, communications taxes on phone bills, energy taxes, cable bill embedded fee taxes, licensing taxes, registration taxes, and the food in their stomach and roof over their head, is a pittance.

A very, very, very, very, tiny pittance.

That represents their actual, real, spendable, after-tax, after-mandatory expenses income.

It's not enough to buy the attention of Senators or Congressmen, or governors. So, that is why when blowhards say stupid shit about us, all we can realistically do is vote for their opponent. That is our one and only recourse.

Stop making those people your representatives. Word to the wise: Hire someone who has ever been poor once. Just once. Obviously they're fabulously rich now and no longer care. But, try to work some actual hard life experience into the fucker at one point, and maybe they won't spout fucking imbecilic statements and make absolutely positively certain that poor people won't vote for them.
Click to expand...
 
miles said:
What a fucking creep. He belongs in jail.
Click to expand...

yeah, you and your "bro" Karen went and posted my children's personal info here, so that makes *me* a "fucking creep" who "belongs in jail".

I sincerely hope to meet you someday so that we might settle our differences, man-to-kike.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

SissyBrandi19
Here is something to consider Re: The MN Tragedy That I Can Almost Guarantee You've Not Heard Discussed
2 3 4
Replies
76
Views
2K
Lazaran
L
Ely1987
Tehran During the War
Replies
16
Views
613
HisArpy
HisArpy
SkyBubble
An Ideology Whose Logic Leads to Murder
2 3
Replies
64
Views
2K
Wilson23
W
B
A Letter of Hope and Compassion
2
Replies
29
Views
1K
Politruk
P
deckardB26354
You’re just going to have to explain it to me…(Trump Edition)
6 7 8
Replies
190
Views
6K
Politruk
P
Back
Top