Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 11-19-2012, 01:25 PM
 
Location: Long Island, NY
19,792 posts, read 13,951,723 times
Reputation: 5661

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by InformedConsent View Post
ALL poll results are skewed, even the ones that favor Dems. As such, skewing wasn't in question.
We saw, first hand, how "skewed" the polls were during the presidential election -- a claim the Republicans made wildly. Those polls were right on accurate.

Any evidence that undermine their faith in their orthodoxy is rejected by modern conservatism.

Last edited by CaseyB; 11-19-2012 at 03:13 PM..

 
Old 11-19-2012, 01:26 PM
 
Location: USA
5,738 posts, read 5,445,071 times
Reputation: 3669
Quote:
Originally Posted by InformedConsent View Post
Then let's all share the cost equally.
Government Spending in United States: Federal State Local for 2013 - Charts Tables History has combined federal state & local spending at $64,824 per capita (I'm not sure how they calculate exactly but it sounds like it's in the right ballpark). This is the cost for all working people and all children and retirees, etc.

This would drive a typical middle class family with children broke. There are not enough bootstraps to go around so everyone in the country can afford this. Even halving government spending would have a huge percentage of the population making zero money or being in debt to the government each year.
 
Old 11-19-2012, 01:30 PM
 
Location: the very edge of the continent
89,026 posts, read 44,840,107 times
Reputation: 13714
Quote:
Originally Posted by MTAtech View Post
The idea that poverty programs, education programs and a safety net increase poverty is preposterous.
They've done nothing to reduce it. And, in fact, they actually incentivize the GROWTH of the welfare class, as the U.S. Census makes perfectly clear:
http://www.city-data.com/forum/22262778-post11.html
 
Old 11-19-2012, 01:32 PM
 
Location: the very edge of the continent
89,026 posts, read 44,840,107 times
Reputation: 13714
Quote:
Originally Posted by MTAtech View Post
We saw, first hand, how "skewed" the polls were during the presidential election -- a claim the Republicans made wildly. Those polls were right on accurate.
Not all of them. Some were skewed as much as +11 D, others were skewed as much as + 3.5 R. Polls were skewed in favor of either party, and both ends of the spectrum were inaccurate.
 
Old 11-19-2012, 01:35 PM
 
Location: the very edge of the continent
89,026 posts, read 44,840,107 times
Reputation: 13714
Quote:
Originally Posted by It'sAutomatic View Post
Government Spending in United States: Federal State Local for 2013 - Charts Tables History has combined federal state & local spending at $64,824 per capita (I'm not sure how they calculate exactly but it sounds like it's in the right ballpark). This is the cost for all working people and all children and retirees, etc.

This would drive a typical middle class family with children broke. There are not enough bootstraps to go around so everyone in the country can afford this.
That's why federal spending must be cut. It's unsustainable. You just proved it.
 
Old 11-19-2012, 02:25 PM
 
Location: Baltimore, MD / NY
781 posts, read 1,196,631 times
Reputation: 434
Quote:
Originally Posted by hawkeye2009 View Post
"Outreach"?

Who cares? When we are at $22 trillion plus in debt when Obama is out, the nation is finished.

Do you think that people with common sense would actually embrace idiocy in an effort to win an election?

If people were dumb enough to vote for Obama, they deserve all the economic misery they voted for. Obama's constituency really thinks that there are unlimited "treats" which they can recieve forever. They will find out, much to their detriment, that this is not the case.
I don't agree with using condescending tone to state your point of view, it's unnecessary imho. But, just our curiosity, have you ever used or taken advantage of any of the following?

529 or Coverdell
Home Mortgage Interest Deduction
Hope or Lifetime Learning Tax Credit
Student Loans
Child and Dependent Care Tax Credit
Earned Income Tax Credit
Social Security—Retirement & Survivors
Pell Grants
Unemployment Insurance
Veterans Benefits (other than G.I. Bill)
G.I. Bill
Medicare
Head Start
Social Security Disability
Supplemental Security Income
Medicaid
Welfare/Public Assistance
Government Subsidized Housing
Food Stamps

Keep Your Government Hands Off My Government Programs! - NYTimes.com
 
Old 11-19-2012, 02:26 PM
 
Location: USA
5,738 posts, read 5,445,071 times
Reputation: 3669
Quote:
Originally Posted by InformedConsent View Post
That's why federal spending must be cut. It's unsustainable. You just proved it.
No, it can be done with a progressive tax scheme. It's absurd to tell both poor families to pay the government $100,000 per year.
 
Old 11-19-2012, 02:33 PM
 
Location: the very edge of the continent
89,026 posts, read 44,840,107 times
Reputation: 13714
Quote:
Originally Posted by It'sAutomatic View Post
No, it can be done with a progressive tax scheme.
We already have a progressive tax scheme, in which the higher earners pay a SIGNIFICANTLY higher percentage of the federal income tax than their share of the income.

Look at the tax shares paid by income group:
Federal Individual Income Tax Share By Income Group

And the income share of each group:
Income Share By Income Group

Our HIGHLY progressive tax system ISN'T working.
 
Old 11-19-2012, 03:13 PM
 
Location: Eastern Colorado
3,887 posts, read 5,748,737 times
Reputation: 5386
How hard is it to understand the United States does not have a tax problem, they have a spending problem. Look at it this way the who fiscal cliff that everybody seems so scared of, is setting most of the spending bank to the clinton levels.

Think about that for a minute, people are scared if spending drops to where it was 12 years ago they think the nation as a whole will suffer tremendously. The government spends too much.
 
Old 11-19-2012, 03:29 PM
 
Location: the very edge of the continent
89,026 posts, read 44,840,107 times
Reputation: 13714
Quote:
Originally Posted by jwiley View Post
How hard is it to understand the United States does not have a tax problem, they have a spending problem.
Apparently, VERY hard.
Quote:
Look at it this way the who fiscal cliff that everybody seems so scared of, is setting most of the spending bank to the clinton levels.

Think about that for a minute, people are scared if spending drops to where it was 12 years ago they think the nation as a whole will suffer tremendously. The government spends too much.
Exactly.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Closed Thread


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 03:23 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top