HobbyKing.com New Products Flash Sale
Reply
Thread Tools
Old Oct 12, 2012, 12:45 AM
Registered User
College Park, MD
Joined Sep 2002
4,714 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by BushmanLA View Post
Ryan was serious, Biden was just nutty.
This doesn't win you voters Biden....


And I suppose spouting vagaries does?
thunder1 is offline Find More Posts by thunder1
Reply With Quote
Old Oct 12, 2012, 12:46 AM
AustinTatious
AustinTatious's Avatar
Hurst, Texas, United States
Joined Jul 2003
1,945 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by flyzwell View Post
It doesn't really matter. Raise the tax to 80% or lower it to 2%. If no one is buying they aren't selling.

And if they aren't selling they aren't hiring.
yea, so raise their taxes, they raise their prices and guess who is really paying the higher tax? higher prices, fewer purchases, less business, less jobs, less tax revenue.
AustinTatious is offline Find More Posts by AustinTatious
Reply With Quote
Old Oct 12, 2012, 12:47 AM
Not watchin from the sideline
Yeaman's Avatar
United States, OH
Joined Nov 2011
36 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by AustinTatious View Post
here is my take.

Biden : he was a complete jerk. He came off as overbearing and rude as well. Very quick to fire of numbers (the fact checking will be interesting) and seemed confident. He is basically saying that the republicans are in the way and that is the reason things are the way they are.

Ryan: what cahones! he told the vp to stfu essentially. He was weak on forien policy or at least he wasn't able to offer any thing additional his party would do. He had a few speach issues mixing up the first letter if a few words. He came off very refined and polite. he let himself get overrun by Biden AND the moderator. that was quite frustrating as a viewer.


I don't like Romney or Obama and I don't like either of these two. No mention of the constitution at all. they both glaze over the obvious (such as businesses don't pay taxes, their customers do). No one is shooting strait. we aren't pulling out of this dive without everyone feeling the g's. Until everyone is wiling to sacrifice and work together we are staying in the tailspin... so yea I'm pretty pessimistic.
+1000

Out of 200 or so posts your one of the few(if any?) who brought up the constitutional aspects and repercussions of the debate.
Yeaman is offline Find More Posts by Yeaman
Reply With Quote
Old Oct 12, 2012, 12:50 AM
Not watchin from the sideline
Yeaman's Avatar
United States, OH
Joined Nov 2011
36 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by AustinTatious View Post
yea, so raise their taxes, they raise their prices and guess who is really paying the higher tax? higher prices, fewer purchases, less business, less jobs, less tax revenue.
I think the pretense of his argument was that nobody was buying. So it would not matter if they were raised or lowered. Which is true, but only in the pretense he limited it to.
Yeaman is offline Find More Posts by Yeaman
Reply With Quote
Old Oct 12, 2012, 01:00 AM
hullabaloo caneck caneck!!!
AggieFlyer's Avatar
USA, MD, Jefferson
Joined Jun 2004
58 Posts
FACT CHECK: Slips in vice president's debate

Quote:
FACT CHECK: Slips in vice president's debate
By CALVIN WOODWARD

WASHINGTON (AP) - Anyone who paid attention to a hearing in Congress this week knew that the administration had been implored to beef up security at the U.S. Consulate in Libya before the deadly terrorist attack there. But in the vice presidential debate Thursday night, Joe Biden seemed unaware.
"We weren't told they wanted more security there," the vice president asserted flatly. During a night in which Biden and Republican rival Paul Ryan both drifted from the facts on a range of domestic and foreign issues, that was a standout.
A look at some of their claims:
BIDEN: "Well, we weren't told they wanted more security there. We did not know they wanted more security again. And by the way, at the time we were told exactly - we said exactly what the intelligence community told us that they knew. That was the assessment. And as the intelligence community changed their view, we made it clear they changed their view."
RYAN: "There were requests for more security."
THE FACTS: Ryan is right, judging by testimony from Obama administration officials at the hearing a day earlier.
Charlene R. Lamb, a deputy assistant secretary for diplomatic security, told lawmakers she refused requests for more security in Benghazi, saying the department wanted to train Libyans to protect the consulate. "Yes, sir, I said personally I would not support it," she said.
Eric Nordstrom, who was the top security official in Libya earlier this year, testified he was criticized for seeking more security. He said conversations he had with people in Washington led him to believe that it was "abundantly clear we were not going to get resources until the aftermath of an incident. How thin does the ice have to get before someone falls through?"
He said his exasperation reached a point where he told a colleague that "for me the Taliban is on the inside of the building."
---
RYAN: "Look at just the $90 billion in stimulus the vice president was in charge of overseeing - this $90 billion in green pork to campaign contributors and special interest groups."
THE FACTS: Dismissing an entire package of energy stimulus grants and loans as "green pork" ignores the help that was given to people to make their homes more energy efficient, grants to public entities constructing high speed rail lines and tax credits to manufacturers to install equipment fostering cleaner energy.
To be sure, there were notable failed investments, such as $528 million to the politically connected and now-bankrupt solar power company Solyndra. But Ryan's claim made it sound like every penny went down the drain.
More broadly, economists are nearly universal in saying Obama's $800 billion-plus stimulus passed in early 2009 helped create both public-sector and private-sector jobs, even if they fell short of what sponsors had hoped. Douglas Elmendorf, director of the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office, estimated the stimulus saved or created more than 3 million jobs.
---
BIDEN: "We went out and rescued General Motors."
THE FACTS: Actually, the auto bailout of General Motors and Chrysler began under President George W. Bush. The Obama administration continued and expanded it.
--- RYAN: "And then they put this new Obamacare board in charge of cutting Medicare each and every year in ways that will lead to denied care for current seniors. This board, by the way, it's 15 people, the president's supposed to appoint them next year. And not one of them even has to have medical training."
THE FACTS: Ryan is referring to the Independent Payment Advisory Board, created under President Barack Obama's health care overhaul law. It has the power to force cuts in Medicare payments to service providers if costs rise above certain levels and Congress fails to act. But it doesn't look like the board will be cutting Medicare "each and every year," as Ryan asserts. Medicare costs are currently rising modestly and the government's own experts project the board's intervention will not be needed until 2018 and 2019 at the earliest - after Obama leaves office if re-elected to a second term.
---
BIDEN, when asked who would pay more taxes in Obama's second term: "People making a million dollars or more."
THE FACTS: Obama's proposed tax increase reaches farther down the income ladder than millionaires. He wants to roll back Bush-era tax cuts for individuals making over $200,000 and couples making more than $250,000.
---
RYAN: "We cannot allow Iran to gain a nuclear weapons capability. Now, let's take a look at where we've gone - come from. When Barack Obama was elected, they had enough fissile material - nuclear material - to make one bomb. Now they have enough for five. They're racing toward a nuclear weapon. They're four years closer toward a nuclear weapons capability."
THE FACTS: Ryan's claim is misleading. Iran isn't believed to have produced any of the highly enriched uranium needed to produce even one nuclear weapon, let alone five. That point isn't even disputed by Israel, whose Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu implored the world at the United Nations last month to create a "red line" at enrichment above 20 percent. Iran would have to enrich uranium at much higher levels to produce a weapon. There is intelligence suggesting that Iran has worked on weapon designs, but not that it has developed a delivery system for any potential nuclear warhead.
---
BIDEN: "What we did is, we saved $716 billion and put it back, applied it to Medicare."
THE FACTS: Contrary to Biden's assertion, not all the money cut from Medicare is going back into the program in some other way. The administration is cutting $716 billion over 10 years in Medicare payments to providers and using some of the money to improve benefits under the program. But most of the money is being used to expand health care coverage outside of Medicare.
---
RYAN: "What troubles me more is how this administration has handled all of these issues. Look at what they're doing through Obamacare with respect to assaulting the religious liberties of this country. They're infringing upon our first freedom, the freedom of religion, by infringing on Catholic charities, Catholic churches, Catholic hospitals."
THE FACTS: The requirement under the health care law that most employers cover birth control free of charge to female employees does not apply to churches, houses of worship, or other institutions directly involved in propagating a religious faith. It does apply to church-affiliated institutions such as hospitals and charities that serve the general public.
---
BIDEN: "Romney said 'No, let Detroit go bankrupt.'"
THE FACTS: GOP presidential candidate Mitt Romney has gotten endless grief through the campaign for the headline put on his November 2008 opinion essay that he wrote for The New York Times. But his point was never that he wanted the auto industry to go down the tubes.
Romney opposed using government money to bail out Chrysler and General Motors, instead favoring privately financed bankruptcy restructuring. His prescription seemed improbable. Automakers were hemorrhaging cash and the banking system was in crisis, so private money wasn't available. Without the government money, it's likely both companies would have gone out of business. Romney did propose government-guaranteed private loans for both companies after bankruptcy.
---
RYAN: "We should have spoken out right away when the green revolution was up and starting, when the mullahs in Iran were attacking their people. We should not have called Bashar Assad a reformer when he was turning his Russian-provided guns on his own people.
THE FACTS: Neither President Barack Obama nor anyone else in his administration ever considered the Syrian leader a "reformer." The oft-repeated charge stems from an interview Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton gave in March 2011 noting that "many of the members of Congress of both parties who have gone to Syria in recent months have said they believe he's a reformer." She did not endorse that view. The comment was widely perceived to be a knock at senators such as John Kerry of Massachusetts who maintained cordial relations with Assad in the months leading up to his crackdown on protesters.
---
RYAN: "This one tax would actually tax about 53 percent of small-business income."
BIDEN: "Ninety-seven percent of the small businesses in America pay less - make less than $250,000."

THE FACTS: Both are correct, but incomplete, when sizing up the effect on small business of raising taxes for individuals making more than $200,000 and married couples making more than $250,000, as Obama wants to do. Republicans say that would hit small-business owners who report business income on their individual income tax; Democrats say the overwhelming majority of small businesses would not be affected.
According to a 2010 report by the Joint Committee on Taxation, the official scorekeeper for Congress, about 3 percent of people who report business income would face a tax increase under Obama's plan. That support's Biden's point.
The same report says those business owners account for about half of all business income. That supports Ryan.
---
RYAN: Notes that there have been four rounds of U.N. sanctions on Iran to deter its nuclear program, three during the Bush administration and one under Obama. "And the only reason we got it is because Russia watered it down and prevented the sanctions from hitting the central bank. Mitt Romney proposed these sanctions in 2007. In Congress, I've been fighting for these sanctions since 2009. The administration was blocking us every step of the way." He also noted the administration has granted 20 waivers to the sanctions.
THE FACTS: The argument that the administration was watering down or delaying sanctions is misleading. For sanctions to work, they need maximum global agreement and cooperation. Russia watered down U.N. sanctions not only under Obama, but also under Bush. And it's highly unlikely that a Romney administration, particularly led by a candidate who says Russia is the biggest geostrategic threat to the U.S., would be able to get Russia completely on board with what the U.S. wants to - either in Iran or Syria.
The more absolute U.S. sanctions that Ryan and others have pushed in Congress would have punished U.S. allies, including most countries in Europe as well as Japan and South Korea, along with good friends like India and Singapore - without the exemptions that were put in place.
The administration has indeed granted 20 waivers, to countries that made significant reductions in Iranian oil imports. And the sanctions are pinching; Iran has been convulsed over the past week with protests over the collapse of its currency, which most people say is a direct result of the sanctions that the U.S. and others have imposed.
---
Associated Press writers Bradley Klapper, Tom Raum, Ricardo Alonso-Zaldivar, Stephen Ohlemacher, Tom Krisher and Matthew Lee contributed to this report.
http://apnews.excite.com/article/201...DA1RPJRG1.html
AggieFlyer is offline Find More Posts by AggieFlyer
Reply With Quote
Old Oct 12, 2012, 01:03 AM
AustinTatious
AustinTatious's Avatar
Hurst, Texas, United States
Joined Jul 2003
1,945 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yeaman View Post
I think the pretense of his argument was that nobody was buying. So it would not matter if they were raised or lowered. Which is true, but only in the pretense he limited it to.
ok, I can play that game too...... lower taxes and prices drop, sales increase.

taxes are a noose on the economy.
AustinTatious is offline Find More Posts by AustinTatious
Reply With Quote
Old Oct 12, 2012, 01:05 AM
Registered User
College Park, MD
Joined Sep 2002
4,714 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by AustinTatious View Post
ok, I can play that game too...... lower taxes and prices drop, sales increase.

taxes are a noose on the economy.
Taxes are actually boosting the economy right now, as is deficit spending. The economy would really be in the crapper if all those people on unemployment and food stamps, etc. were to suddenly stop buying things and paying their mortgages.
thunder1 is offline Find More Posts by thunder1
Reply With Quote
Old Oct 12, 2012, 01:12 AM
AustinTatious
AustinTatious's Avatar
Hurst, Texas, United States
Joined Jul 2003
1,945 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by thunder1 View Post
Taxes are actually boosting the economy right now, as is deficit spending. The economy would really be in the crapper if all those people on unemployment and food stamps, etc. were to suddenly stop buying things and paying their mortgages.
I don't disagree. Howev all you have shown is that we are artificially holding the economy up (not very well mind you). Certainly you agree this cannot continue right?

I have never seen anyone suggest that you cut all that off at once.
AustinTatious is offline Find More Posts by AustinTatious
Reply With Quote
Old Oct 12, 2012, 01:13 AM
Registered User
flyzwell's Avatar
So Cal
Joined May 2008
2,633 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yeaman View Post
I think the pretense of his argument was that nobody was buying. So it would not matter if they were raised or lowered. Which is true, but only in the pretense he limited it to.
Yep.
flyzwell is offline Find More Posts by flyzwell
Reply With Quote
Old Oct 12, 2012, 01:14 AM
Registered User
flyzwell's Avatar
So Cal
Joined May 2008
2,633 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by AustinTatious View Post
yea, so raise their taxes, they raise their prices and guess who is really paying the higher tax? higher prices, fewer purchases, less business, less jobs, less tax revenue.
I don,t think lower taxes are the answer to the problem we face, although I'm all for them. The world economy seems to be in turmoil. No country is producing or exporting as much as they used to because the demand for product has diminished.

No demand for product=no hiring.

lower taxes a little but cut loopholes...ehh I don't see prices changing all that much to turn around the world economy or creating jobs here.
flyzwell is offline Find More Posts by flyzwell
Reply With Quote
Old Oct 12, 2012, 01:23 AM
Registered User
College Park, MD
Joined Sep 2002
4,714 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by AustinTatious View Post
I don't disagree. Howev all you have shown is that we are artificially holding the economy up (not very well mind you). Certainly you agree this cannot continue right?

I have never seen anyone suggest that you cut all that off at once.
Ryans budget makes significant cuts to welfare programs.

What can't continue is the belief that taxes can stay low and pay for the government the GOP wants. Huge defense and Medicare giveaways to the insurance and drug companies can not continue. Cutting Big Bird's funding doesn't even come close to fixing any of that. Neither does giving rich guys tax breaks. As I said in the other thread, we've been on the left side of the Laffer curve since GWB cut taxes.
thunder1 is offline Find More Posts by thunder1
Reply With Quote
Old Oct 12, 2012, 01:25 AM
AustinTatious
AustinTatious's Avatar
Hurst, Texas, United States
Joined Jul 2003
1,945 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by flyzwell View Post
I don,t think lower taxes are the answer to the problem we face, although I'm all for them. The world economy seems to be in turmoil. No country is producing or exporting as much as they used to because the demand for product has diminished.

No demand for product=no hiring.

lower taxes a little but cut loopholes...ehh I don't see prices changing all that much to turn around the world economy or creating jobs here.
I think exports are down because things are becoming more service based... which even more clearly illustrates or highlights rather the effects of taxes on prices and the economy. merchandise seems to cloud the issue. However when you look at a service, it is easy to see that if taxes are levied on that service provider, he will simply charge more for his service. Now it is the customer who is paying that tax.

Yes, the world economy is in trouble and wouldn't you know it, all across the world, governments are meddling in markets, manipulating currency and taxing the crap out of their subjects.
AustinTatious is offline Find More Posts by AustinTatious
Reply With Quote
Old Oct 12, 2012, 01:29 AM
AustinTatious
AustinTatious's Avatar
Hurst, Texas, United States
Joined Jul 2003
1,945 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by thunder1 View Post
What can't continue is the belief that taxes can stay low and pay for the government the GOP wants. Huge defense and Medicare giveaways to the insurance and drug companies can not continue. Cutting Big Bird's funding doesn't even come close to fixing any of that. Neither does giving rich guys tax breaks. As I said in the other thread, we've been on the left side of the Laffer curve since GWB cut taxes.
again, I agree. I'm pessimistic enough that I don't think we can recover from this mess without a catastrophic monetary failure, but I've believed that since the 7th grade when I learned about our monetary system and also the governments blatant and many overreaching (constitutionally) of power

... I just hope it isn't in my lifetime, or at least for the next 15-20 years. before that I don't know how I will fare.

if I was forced to attempt a solution.....

eliminated the fed
return to gold standard
strip every federal government function not specified in the constitution.

it would get really ugly, but not as ugly as the collapse I believe is inevitable.
AustinTatious is offline Find More Posts by AustinTatious
Reply With Quote
Old Oct 12, 2012, 01:36 AM
Registered User
College Park, MD
Joined Sep 2002
4,714 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by AustinTatious View Post
again, I agree. I'm pessimistic enough that I don't think we can recover from this mess without a catastrophic monetary failure, but I've believed that since the 7th grade when I learned about our monetary system and also the governments blatant and many overreaching (constitutionally) of power

... I just hope it isn't in my lifetime, or at least for the next 15-20 years. before that I don't know how I will fare.

if I was forced to attempt a solution.....

eliminated the fed
return to gold standard
strip every federal government function not specified in the constitution.

it would get really ugly, but not as ugly as the collapse I believe is inevitable.
Our problems aren't created by the fed. They are created by corporations corrupting politicians who control the fed. The gold standard is not any kind of way out of our mess at this point. That's simply a dog that won't hunt.

I believe that every current function of government is fully constitutional.

I'm optimistic enough to feel that with proper management of our debt, and cutting the right spending, we can work out our problems. Our nation needs to learn that spending huge amounts of money chasing bad guys half way around the world is counter-productive. That, along with trying to make every aspect of our lives as safe and secure as can be with crippling drug laws and insane security requirements, and we have a millstone around our necks the size of the moon.

I have no doubt if the "yous" and "mes" of this fine nation were to get together and straighten things out, we'd be in fine shape. But there are too many on both of our sides dragging us into the nonsense to make any headway. There is too much money involved, too much corporate influence over government, to allow a reasonable recovery.
thunder1 is offline Find More Posts by thunder1
Reply With Quote
Old Oct 12, 2012, 01:53 AM
Registered User
flyzwell's Avatar
So Cal
Joined May 2008
2,633 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by AustinTatious View Post
I think exports are down because things are becoming more service based...
Service based jobs are not enough to support our economy. We need to put people to work manufacturing.

I don't think manufacturing is coming back unless some new invention comes along like the steam engine, railroad, combustion engine, electricity, or computers.
flyzwell is offline Find More Posts by flyzwell
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools

Similar Threads
Category Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Found Parkzone Nite Vapor or Ember Marinoob Aircraft - Electric - Micro & Indoor Airplanes (FS/W) 1 Sep 09, 2012 08:09 AM
Sold (2) TechOne Micro Flight Paks - Last price drop tonite. sgomes Aircraft - Electric - Power Systems (FS/W) 1 Mar 22, 2012 08:37 PM
Discussion LEG's Jack Cooper is in town, dinner tonite? Jeff Charlot Slope 28 Dec 24, 2005 02:02 PM