| Author | Message | ||
     Doug_s |
pssst - ya, i know about social security/medicare/medicaid. a third-rate system for the richest nation on the planet, methinks. and psssst. i agree, the constitution has been twisted. but in ways that are appealing to some, and not appealing to others. for example, i find roe v wade acceptable under the constitution, but granting corporations rights of free speech unacceptable. others think both are acceptable, others think neither are acceptable, others think the exact opposite of the way i think. good luck trying to do anything about it, short of a completely new constitutional conwention for a re-write. and, good luck to that. doug s. | ||
| Ft_bstrd |
pssst - ya, i know about social security/medicare/medicaid. a third-rate system for the richest nation on the planet, methinks. "third-rate" systems because the Federal Government continues to pilfer them and mismanage them. We will only get LOTS more of the same. Additionally, these entitlement programs shouldn't exist in the first place. If a STATE wants to create them, great. A Federal Government with unlimited powers will eventually devolve into that form which all unlimited government falls, tyranny. | ||
| Liquorwhere |
http://www.wimp.com/budgetcuts | ||
| Iamike |
To get back on topic, I am going to Milwaukee next month for a Lions Club convention. One of their activities is a tour of the plant (not Buell's). Other than wearing a Buell shirt are than any ideas that I can use while I'm wandering around? Thanks, | ||
| Court |
WOW. This thread is wallowing in inaccurate information. My wife does the personal taxes of 3 of the Hedge Fund folks she works with (she's the CFO) and I don't know much but I know the that 3 folks, 2 worth over $1B and one young kid only worth about $880M, most certainly do NOT pay "almost no tax". The least of them paid more in federal income tax last year than I'll bet the sum total of my entire company (a Fortune 500 firm) paid together. Why the "rich pay little or no taxes" make great headlines . . t'aint necessarily so. By the way . . . If I ever hed to write a check for $67,000,000 to the U.S. Treasury for Federal Income tax I'd croak and be begging to be poor.  Incindently . . . nearly all the money that was earned to owe that tax went directly into purchases and investments that created hundreds of thousands of jobs. If was a shame to see Mr. Druckenmiller decide, last Wednesday, to simply look at the current situation and announce he was leaving. He . . like Google (currently sitting on $25,000,000,000 of cash) and many other corporations and individuals are so scared of the current administration they are not about to hire anybody or take any risk. There has never been more cash hoarded, in corporate accounts or under mattresses, than there currently is. | ||
| Redbuelljunkie |
Wear a FUHD shirt, and take pictures... | ||
| Ft_bstrd |
But Court, Warren Buffett said it. | ||
| Slaughter |
The notion of PERCENTAGE vs AMOUNT of tax paid is where the mathematically challenged always seem to put their arguments. The folks that may pay "only" 10-15% are paying an EXTRAORDINARILY HUGE amount of dollars in taxes. When you add their TOTAL tax liability on top of their "tiny percentage" - it becomes huge. The thing that is easy to forget is that the evil rich are responsible for a HUGE amount of cash flow - and while we don't (yet) have a VAT, when their money moves and changes hands, THOSE taxes (excise, sales, use-tax, property taxes, other fees) - are not seen by those willing to use "PERCENTAGE" as the only metric. Yes, both sides can easily trot out their poster children - the Ken Lay or the unemployed pregnant single mom with 3 children. So, is Harley moving? They gonna have a sale? I could use some more tools. | ||
| Ft_bstrd |
People also forget that the wealthy are the ones who provide 100% of the private loan equity. When banks don't have deposits, they can't make loans. Period. | ||
| Court |
I'm still reeling from being told, last week, that we were "on the road to recovery" only to read that 500,000 more folks lost their jobs that week. I'm not sure how much more of this wonderful recovery we can take. I'm sure glad the big o showed those greedy Wall Street evil doers a lesson. Nothing like having a neighborhood organizer at the helm of the world's greatest economy. We deserve better leaders. I have a lot of faith in America but as long as we adopt this "everyone in the class is #1" and we demand that the smart and the dumb, the hard workers and the lazy all be treated equal the natural consequences of such stupidity are predictable. How bad do you really think Stanley, at the same age I am, feels about not having to go to work next week? I sometimes wonder if some of those, so quick to badmouth the uber rich, met someone like Stanley if they'd still badmouth them. I've never met him but am told by folks who know him that he's one dickens of a nice guy. The current administration just took his bucks out of play. . . .but somehow I suspect he'll survive. I saw that his cohort George Soros pulled all his money out of American markets last week. Between the two of those guys they accounted, very likely, for more job creation than the entire corrupted stimulus bill that pissed away $878,000,000,000 on mostly foolishness. Ask an unemployed person how they feel about the largest spending bill in history that was meant to create work. Failure is a word that falls far short of describing what these clowns have done. | ||
| Sifo |
WOW. This thread is wallowing in inaccurate information. +1 on that Court. I took another look at one of Doug's favorite sources, the 22 Statistics That Prove The Middle Class Is Being Systematically Wiped Out Of Existence In America. This is where the claim of "83 percent of all U.S. stocks are in the hands of 1 percent of the people" comes from. I've already shown that this is complete BS. I took a look at some of their other claims. They seem to claim things and support their claim with unrelated data. Another of their claims is "As of 2007, the bottom 80 percent of American households held about 7% of the liquid financial assets". They support this with data on only Stock, Bond and Mutual Funds. Of course these aren't the only types of liquid assets. In fact the lower income groups will keep what assets they have in cash. Omitting that just skews the results. Total BS. The interesting thing is they use this graphic...  This pretty well refutes the first claim they had that "83 percent of all U.S. stocks are in the hands of 1 percent of the people". While this isn't perfect data to look at stock owner ship only, the inclusion of bond ownership isn't going to skew things this much. This source refutes it's own claims. Looks like much closer to 50% of stocks is owned by the top 1%. So Doug, are you willing to concede that your sources are BS yet? I've shown multiple times now that they draw conclusions that just are not supported by the data they present. Still clinging to these "truths"? | ||
| Reindog |
Ladies and gentlemen, we have a Threadwinner! It took doug_s only FIVE words from "save your insults" to hurling his own spitbomb. Way to go, 160! | ||
| Sifo |
I'm more interested in if he will show himself to be honest at this point and admit that he was pushing BS. | ||
| Slaughter |
I have no interest in solving anything - at least on Badweb, I'm just post-whoring. | ||
| Reindog |
I am designing a BufferDescripter arbitration unit right now. Slithering over here for a few minutes is better than a cup of java to figure out how to resolve collisions. Maybe if I just insult my code, my code will admit to being wrong.  | ||
| Sifo |
 | ||
| Reindog |
The "22 Statistics That Prove The Middle Class Is Being Systematically Wiped Out Of Existence In America" is written by some honcho named Michael Snyder. He is a real party poodle. Here are some of his other offerings. Even Tony Robbins Is Warning That An Economic Collapse Is Coming 18 Signs That America Is Rotting Right In Front Of Our Eyes 15 Economic Statistics That Just Keep Getting Worse Snyder has a financial interest in being a Bad News Bear so it is advisable to find counterbalance for the best chance of approaching the truth. It is interesting that doug_s preaches "shades of gray" when his guru is a black-and-white "the sky is falling" prophet of doom. Come towards the Conservative Light, doug_s. I guarantee that you will get all the hot chicks and your cholesterol will fall below 100. Well maybe not, but you will be on the correct road to understanding what makes America great. | ||
| Doug_s |
ok, sifo, here is the deal. i pulled one stat that says 1% of the population owns 83%. you pull one that says 10% owns a bit over 90%. you can pull as many more as you like - they will all be in this range. are you happy now? either way, the story is the same, regarding the point i am making - fact that those at the top own most everything. (and, perhaps you are a bit slow? i ask this because this is the second time i have said that your "proof" that i am lying and full of bs in fact makes the same point i am making, even if the stats are not exactly the same.) and what point is it that you were trying to make? that i am lying? posting inaccurate bs? sifo, what, exactly is it that you are interested in? you still have refused to tell me how aborting a 3 month old fetus is murdering a baby, and how the supreme court holding that corporations have the same free speech rights as humans is not conserwative judicial activism? and you still have refused to tell me how/why you think it's ok that the wealthy own most of everything, regardless of whether it's 1% of the population owning 83% of stocks, or 10% owning 90.3%, or somewhere in between. if you accuse me of lying and posting bs stats, and the best you can do is find stats that still support my argument, well, you're gonna have to do better than that. cuz, you're only making yourself look ridiculous. now, if you disagree w/the point i am making, that's another story. i want to know if you will show yourself to be more interested in discussing actual issues instead of resorting to lame attempts to awoid them by throwing out bs claims that someone is dishonest, doesn't post accurate info, etc. but, i'm not holding my breath.  i guess i could take reindog's suggestion and admit i am wrong, even tho i am not, yust cuz you're trying to insult me.  doug s. | ||
| Swampy |
Yeah, so the question is: During the coming apocalypse what will prevent you from setting up some subsistence business to help you survive? I believe it will be the gobblety-gook of government intervention and regulatory interference from every agency that you don't know about that will make it impossible to do what needs to get done. Yeah, you are right, but it's 3:45 in the morning, I am a newlywed, I can't sleep, and I need to get my post count up because I don't know how to hack computers to change things like that. | ||
| Doug_s |
quote: sifo, save your insults. just because you are ignorant, does not make me dishonest. Ladies and gentlemen, we have a Threadwinner! It took doug_s only FIVE words from "save your insults" to hurling his own spitbomb. Way to go, 160! hey reindog, ever hear the latin expression "res ipsa loquitur"? it means "the thing speaks for itself." mebbe my comment about sifo would be an insult, but i think his posts attacking me speak for themselves about his intelligence. sifo refuses to address the ideas i am expressing, and lamely tries to show i am dishonest and full of bs by posting stats that say basically the same thing as the stats i have posted, even if the numbers are not exactly the same. i thought i was only stating he obvious. if i have misjudged, and sifo is actually bright, then there's some character flaw there... 160 | ||
| Doug_s |
A Federal Government with unlimited powers will eventually devolve into that form which all unlimited government falls, tyranny. i agree 100% with this much. exactly what's happening today. the corporations are taking over for sure. them sitting on their cash is only another indication of this. they think then can get republicans in if they stonewall, so they can go back to fat city. regardless of the problems our economy is facing now, it is not the present administration that caused the mess, even if you now don't like how it's being handled. truth be told, i am not too crazy about a lot of what i have seen either. but, if the supply siders get back in, it will yust start again the same policies that lead to the fall 2008 collapse... and, i still haven't heard barack's opposition tell how they'd have done it different, re: stimulus packages/bailouts... doug s. | ||
| Sifo |
ok, sifo, here is the deal. i pulled one stat that says 1% of the population owns 83%. you pull one that says 10% owns a bit over 90%. you can pull as many more as you like - they will all be in this range. are you happy now? Doug, the point here... AGAIN, is that the source you keep coming back to is taking statistics and claiming it says something it doesn't. That is simply dishonest. When it's pointed out to you what is being done you choose to stay with the points being made by the dishonest "journalist". That too is dishonest. My point is that your source is using a BS statistic to push their 1% owning 83% BS when in the same piece they have a stat showing 1% owning 51%. They use that to make a different BS claim though. You're claim that 83% or 51% is about the same is dishonest. i want to know if you will show yourself to be more interested in discussing actual issues instead of resorting to lame attempts to awoid them by throwing out bs claims that someone is dishonest, doesn't post accurate info, etc. but, i'm not holding my breath. I've shown that I will discuss things with anyone who will have a reasonably honest exchange of views. You don't fall into that category though. Expanding the discussion with you into other topics just isn't going to happen. There's no point to it at all. You've shown me that you are not a person who will have an honest exchange of ideas. | ||
| Ft_bstrd |
i agree 100% with this much. exactly what's happening today. the corporations are taking over for sure. them sitting on their cash is only another indication of this. they think then can get republicans in if they stonewall, so they can go back to fat city. regardless of the problems our economy is facing now, it is not the present administration that caused the mess, even if you now don't like how it's being handled. truth be told, i am not too crazy about a lot of what i have seen either. but, if the supply siders get back in, it will yust start again the same policies that lead to the fall 2008 collapse... and, i still haven't heard barack's opposition tell how they'd have done it different, re: stimulus packages/bailouts... doug s. A Federal Government properly constrained is virtually immune to the influence of corporate money. It is precisely because the Federal Government has overstepped its bounds that corporate influence is present. The problem is that you appear to be advocating that unlimited power be given to the Federal Government in one instance and limited powers being granted in another. Personal welfare is good but corporate welfare is bad? How does that work? How specifically will the bottom 50% be benefited by the redistributive justice you advocate? If the Federal Government confiscated 100% of the earnings above $1M and redistributed it to the bottom 50%, what would be the long term outcome? What would happen to the price of goods when those who produce the goods have their net income taxed at a greater and greater percentage? Supply side economics wasn't the cause of 2008. Greater Keynesian Economic policies (which caused 2008) are not the cure for 2008. | ||
| Doug_s |
My point is that your source is using a BS statistic to push their 1% owning 83% BS when in the same piece they have a stat showing 1% owning 51%. They use that to make a different BS claim though. You're claim that 83% or 51% is about the same is dishonest. this is so ridiculous as to defy comprehension. i have already told you twice that i am happy to accept that my initial stat may be incorrect. i am happy to accept your 51% figure. why? because your stat, (which i am so certain is gospel truth, because you found it), says exactly the same thing as what i posted. even if it's not quite so extreme. >90% of the wealth being owned by 10% of the population is still extreme methinks. and you say i am the one being dishonest, so you can't have an honest exchange of ideas with me? how conveeeeeenient!  doug s. | ||
| Doug_s |
fatty, in theory i agree w/you. the problem is that the constitution is what the supreme court says it is. that being the case, i don't see how giving corporations free rein over the government, (which is basically what they have, and it's only been getting worse the past 40 years), is being wery helpful. and, i said nothing about taking 100% of anyone's earnings, and redistributing it to anyone. your hypothetical example is absurd, and certainly nothing even close to anything i would be in favor of. but, something as simple as rolling back the gwb tax cuts wouldn't be a bad idea. improving the infrastructure of the country, which is literally falling apart at the seams wouldn't be a bad idea. improving education and healthcare wouldn't be a bad idea, since we rank relatively poorly amongst the modern world countries. some stats... (yes, sifo - you are more than welcome to try to pick them apart; i am sure you can find others that are different, but say essentially the same thing, yust like you did w/the the stats showing the percentage of who owns what in america): USA Ranking on Adult Literacy Scale: #9 (#1 Sweden and #2 Norway)- OECD USA Ranking on Healthcare Quality Index: #37 (#1 France and #2 Italy)- World Health Organization 2003 USA Ranking of Student Reading Ability: #12 (#1 Finland and #2 South Korea)- OECD PISA 2003 USA Ranking of Student Problem Solving Ability: #26 (#1 South Korea and #2 Finland)- OECD PISA 2003 USA Ranking on Student Mathematics Ability: # 24 (#1 Hong Kong and #2 Finland)- OECD PISA 2003 USA Ranking of Student Science Ability: #19 (#1 Finland and #2 Japan)- OECD PISA 2003 USA Ranking on Women's Rights Scale: #17 (#1 Sweden and #2 Norway)- World Economic Forum Report USA Position on Timeline of Gay Rights Progress: # 6 (1997) (#1 Sweden 1987 and #2 Norway 1993)- Vexen USA Ranking on Life Expectancy: #29 (#1 Japan and #2 Hong Kong)- UN Human Development Report 2005 USA Ranking on Journalistic Press Freedom Index: #32 (#1 Finland, Iceland, Norway and the Netherlands tied)- Reporters Without Borders 2005 USA Ranking on Political Corruption Index: #17 (#1 Iceland and #2 Finland)- Transparency International 2005 USA Ranking on Quality of Life Survey: #13 (#1 Ireland and #2 Switzerland)- The Economist Magazine ...Wikipedia "Celtic Tiger" if you still have your doubts. USA Ranking on Environmental Sustainability Index: #45 (#1 Finland and #2 Norway)- Yale University ESI 2005 USA Ranking on Overall Currency Strength: #3 (US Dollar) (#1 UK pound sterling and #2 European Union euro)- FTSE 2006....the dollar is now a liability, so many banks worldwide have planned to switch to euro USA Ranking on Infant Mortality Rate: #32 (#1 Sweden and #2 Finland)- Save the Children Report 2006 USA Ranking on Human Development Index (GDP, education, etc.): #10 (#1 Norway and #2 Iceland)- UN Human Development Report 2005 doug s. | ||
| Sifo |
Good Lord man! Try to comprehend. What you claim is something that I found comes from YOUR source. They are just using it to make a different and unsubstantiated point. This is the same way that the same source (your source) came up with the 1% owning 83% thing. It's just that this information refutes the 1% thing, by a large margin. That's just dishonest representation of the information that they have collected. Either you are completely stupid and can't see that or you are being just as dishonest. I haven't done anything to refute your source yet. All I've done is show that they are full of BS according to their own data. Is it really honest to claim 83% when the data you have in the same piece clearly shows less than 51%? Are you even able to comprehend this? | ||
| Swampy |
What is the ranking for sexual satisfaction? men? women? What is the ranking for sexual fequency? men? women? | ||
| Jima4media |
Harley is moving to Hong Kong. Done deal. Get over it. It is all because of that Kenya-born muslim Hussein Obama. Get over it. George W. Bush, the patron saint of the Republican Party, will endorse Sarah Palin as the future queen of American in 2012, and all will be right with the universe. Buell will be making its comeback by then, and we will all be rich enough to afford one or two. Drill baby, Drill! (and wake me up in two years) Jim | ||
| Ft_bstrd |
fatty, in theory i agree w/you. the problem is that the constitution is what the supreme court says it is. Therein lies the problem. The court was NEVER intended to be the body that defined or redefined the Constitution. Your complaint is that the wealthy are becoming the oligarchy, but you are fine with allowing 9 unelected life long positions to act as the Executive, Legislative, AND Judicial branches. This is the very definition of oligarchy. The issue is not whether or not we have an oligarchy but whether the oligarchy is one you prefer. | ||
| Doug_s |
fatty it is not that i am fine w/it. do you have any suggestions, tho, about what to do about it? as it now stands, different people on both sides of the political fence have different ideas about what constitutes strict construction vs judicial activism. as long as the constitution allows the supreme court to define what the constitution is, and as long as there are human beings on the supreme court, i don't see much that can be done about it. a new constitution, perhaps? doug s. |
