Aces Posted October 4, 2011 Share Posted October 4, 2011 Personal attack!!!! Personal attack!!!!!!! Sad. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aces Posted October 4, 2011 Share Posted October 4, 2011 Another good article from the Economist. "A self-induced recession Oct 3rd 2011, 17:05 by G.I. | WASHINGTON" http://www.economist.com/blogs/freeexchange/2011/10/economics-v-politics "In America, the biggest policy-related threat is the fiscal tightening that will happen automatically in the next four months as prior stimulus expires and legislated cuts to discretionary spending bite. Barack Obama has proposed $447 billion in new or renewed stimulus to neutralise that threat, but it requires an ambitious deal in Congress’ super committee, and odds of such a deal by its November 23rd deadline are shrinking. Democrats are reportedly trying to get it to consider tax hikes immediately, and Republicans are apparently saying that puts a big deficit reduction deal out of reach. A global economy with decent cyclical fuel and no obvious imbalances is being betrayed by politics. Policy has pushed us over the brink in the past when it was for our own good (ie, inflation was threatening). If it happens now, it will be the first recorded instance of it happening by obduracy instead of by choice." Seems like America is destroying itself. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xr7g428 Posted October 5, 2011 Share Posted October 5, 2011 Making stuff up about me seems to be a major effort of the right wing posters here......I guess that is all they can do since they object to reading...or learning. So you continue to link bomb. No real surprise in that. You just validated every word. Skip the name calling. It makes you look even more the fool. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FiredMotorCompany Posted October 5, 2011 Share Posted October 5, 2011 Sad. You've done your share of "cryin" as well. Just as sad. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickF1011 Posted October 5, 2011 Share Posted October 5, 2011 Aces, no more link bombing. Subsequent link bombs will be removed. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aces Posted October 5, 2011 Share Posted October 5, 2011 (edited) Aces, no more link bombing. Subsequent link bombs will be removed. Why not just ban me, since you don't like my viewpoint and are obviously one of those that cannot read or stand to hear another view than your own narrow perception? Perhaps we can rename the Forum...The Republican Times? As another poster said...what is a link bomb?...something you don't agree with. Edited October 5, 2011 by Aces Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aces Posted October 5, 2011 Share Posted October 5, 2011 So you continue to link bomb. No real surprise in that. You just validated every word. Skip the name calling. It makes you look even more the fool. That's funny....looks like you are the one doing the name calling and attacking the poster. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickF1011 Posted October 5, 2011 Share Posted October 5, 2011 (edited) Why not just ban me, since you don't like my viewpoint and are obviously one of those that cannot read or stand to hear another view than your own narrow perception? Perhaps we can rename the Forum...The Republican Times? As another poster said...what is a link bomb?...something you don't agree with. Post something of your own for once and it won't be deleted. Posting a link with half the article copied and pasted under it without any of your own analysis is not going to fly here anymore. "Seems like America is destroying itself." "Seems like the Tea Party Republicans are intent on crashing the American economy." "Interesting article on "Industrial Policy"" ....is not analysis and personal opinion. Edited October 5, 2011 by NickF1011 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aces Posted October 5, 2011 Share Posted October 5, 2011 Post something of your own for once and it won't be deleted. Posting a link with half the article copied and pasted under it without any of your own analysis is not going to fly here anymore. http://www.blueovalforums.com/forums/index.php?/topic/47062-fact-check-the-wealthy-already-pay-more-taxes/page__view__findpost__p__733457 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aces Posted October 5, 2011 Share Posted October 5, 2011 It seems to me that what is happening here is that some right wingers don't like their beliefs being challenged by facts and article from the press...I suppose they are afraid that some other people will will no longer be taken in and vote against their own interests.......so after much whining, name calling, slander and reporting to the moderators they seek to kill the messenger because they don't like the message. I think this shows that the right wing of today is totally bereft of ideas. I started posting political stuff here in the Fox News thread because I was tired of seeing Ford workers getting taken in by the BS that they heard there. By pointing out the falsehoods and bias I think I helped some to take a step back and look at their news sources with more skepticism. Some of the other threads I have contributed to or started also expose the right wingers lack of truthfulness for all to see. I have an opinion and I back it up with facts or well written articles....it seems that my opinion is not to the liking of some. If you want me gone then you will have to ban me as intimidation will not work. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aces Posted October 5, 2011 Share Posted October 5, 2011 (edited) I like this video Seems like Reagan and Obama agree. Today's far right controlled Republican party worships "St. Ronnie" but if he were running today he would be condemned as a liberal. Edited October 5, 2011 by Aces Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickF1011 Posted October 5, 2011 Share Posted October 5, 2011 I like this video Seems like Reagan and Obama agree. Today's far right controlled Republican party worships "St. Ronnie" but if he were running today he would be condemned as a liberal. Improved. Now keep working on it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickF1011 Posted October 5, 2011 Share Posted October 5, 2011 It seems to me that what is happening here is that some right wingers don't like their beliefs being challenged by facts and article from the press...I suppose they are afraid that some other people will will no longer be taken in and vote against their own interests.......so after much whining, name calling, slander and reporting to the moderators they seek to kill the messenger because they don't like the message. I think this shows that the right wing of today is totally bereft of ideas. I started posting political stuff here in the Fox News thread because I was tired of seeing Ford workers getting taken in by the BS that they heard there. By pointing out the falsehoods and bias I think I helped some to take a step back and look at their news sources with more skepticism. Some of the other threads I have contributed to or started also expose the right wingers lack of truthfulness for all to see. I have an opinion and I back it up with facts or well written articles....it seems that my opinion is not to the liking of some. If you want me gone then you will have to ban me as intimidation will not work. Using blanket terms won't win you any points in any debate. Just a helpful hint. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FiredMotorCompany Posted October 5, 2011 Share Posted October 5, 2011 It seems to me that what is happening here is that some right wingers don't like their beliefs being challenged by facts and article from the press...I suppose they are afraid that some other people will will no longer be taken in and vote against their own interests.......so after much whining, name calling, slander and reporting to the moderators they seek to kill the messenger because they don't like the message. I think this shows that the right wing of today is totally bereft of ideas. I started posting political stuff here in the Fox News thread because I was tired of seeing Ford workers getting taken in by the BS that they heard there. By pointing out the falsehoods and bias I think I helped some to take a step back and look at their news sources with more skepticism. Some of the other threads I have contributed to or started also expose the right wingers lack of truthfulness for all to see. I have an opinion and I back it up with facts or well written articles....it seems that my opinion is not to the liking of some. If you want me gone then you will have to ban me as intimidation will not work. As I have told you before, I cannot debate an article. I can debate YOU and the words you post here. It is YOUR comments that we as forum members can debate back and forth. Start your own website with forums and you can have your own blog to link to articles who speak "for" you. Good luck with that. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cocheese Posted October 5, 2011 Share Posted October 5, 2011 I like this video Seems like Reagan and Obama agree. Today's far right controlled Republican party worships "St. Ronnie" but if he were running today he would be condemned as a liberal. Actually, it sounds like Barry is trying to be more like Ronnie. Glad that teleprompter didn't cut out half way through. I would have loved to hear how he finished that speech. The difference is, what is "their fair share"/ I've never heard anyone from the Left answer that. While Reagan supported closing loop holes (which I agree with), he did not try and put the entire burden on the wealthy. Again, if your side wants the rich to pay their "fair share", then when is everyone else going to do the same? Furthermore, what is wrong with a flat tax? 10% across the board for everyone. Or do you think the harder I work, and the more successful I become, the more tax I should pay? Meanwhile, he lazy and disinterested should can continue to leach of my back? 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aces Posted October 5, 2011 Share Posted October 5, 2011 It seems to me that what is happening here is that some right wingers don't like their beliefs being challenged by facts and article from the press...I suppose they are afraid that some other people will will no longer be taken in and vote against their own interests.......so after much whining, name calling, slander and reporting to the moderators they seek to kill the messenger because they don't like the message. I think this shows that the right wing of today is totally bereft of ideas. I started posting political stuff here in the Fox News thread because I was tired of seeing Ford workers getting taken in by the BS that they heard there. By pointing out the falsehoods and bias I think I helped some to take a step back and look at their news sources with more skepticism. Some of the other threads I have contributed to or started also expose the right wingers lack of truthfulness for all to see. I have an opinion and I back it up with facts or well written articles....it seems that my opinion is not to the liking of some. If you want me gone then you will have to ban me as intimidation will not work. Using blanket terms won't win you any points in any debate. Just a helpful hint. As I have told you before, I cannot debate an article. I can debate YOU and the words you post here. It is YOUR comments that we as forum members can debate back and forth. Start your own website with forums and you can have your own blog to link to articles who speak "for" you. Good luck with that. Seem like the right wingers don't like being called right wingers...perhaps a different name...Tea people.?....Closed minded?...non readers?...afraid to hear different opinion people?..... Republicans?......Libertarians?....... willfully ignorant?................. It is funny how far some will go to avoid having someone disagree with them. When these topics were in the Ford Employees section (where they belonged) some people who did not like to see others express their opinion whined and complained till they were moved here and now some would like all ides sanitized so they could appear on the Rush Limbaugh show. Why do these Libertarians hate free speech? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aces Posted October 5, 2011 Share Posted October 5, 2011 (edited) From your link http://www.tnr.com/article/economy/93219/debt-ceiling-stock-market-downturn " In the United States, the federal government spends 1.7 times its total revenues, leaving the country with a 9-10 percent 2011 GDP budget deficit, and little route to a solution if, as the Republicans demand, no further revenues are raised. It remains unclear how anyone decided that the federal government must not collect revenues exceeding 18 percent of GDP, irrespective of what happens as the society ages, but influential Republicans are pushing for a constitutional amendment that would set this limit in stone. Even tax reforms that would raise revenues, while lowering distortions, are apparently out of the question." The obvious need to raise taxes seems to escape the cult like group that has seized the GOP....it is the one of the only solutions to the fiscal problem in America. Another solution would be found in the Ron Paul camp. Complete closure of all military bases and every other government function.....even then taxes would have to go up to pay for the already accumulated debt. We need to look at entitlements...but not just individual ones. Why do we subsidize certain things? Both through direct subsidies and "tax expenditures"? Do we need to subsidize big oil, big agriculture, rich peoples mortgage interest etc? If subsidies were targeted to increase the tax base (job creation) and were short term they might be worthwhile. Why is mortgage interest deductible? Why does ethanol get subsidized and lower our MPG? Why do highly profitable oil companies need a tax break and a depletion allowance? Why do huge agriculture corporations need a subsidy since the Reagan days? Why do corporate jet owners need a subsidy? I'm sure I missed many more. Quite a bit of info on the mortgage interest deduction here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Home_mortgage_interest_deduction With this proposed change "One solution that offers a potential compromise would be to cap the MID so that homeowners can deduct up to the first $7,000 of interest they pay each year, then not allow any deductions above that amount. With a 30-year loan at 5% fixed interest, this cap would only allow the interest on the first $140,000 to be deducted. With the average home price in the United States in 2010 at $272,900, [24] 50% of Americans would see a tax increase of at least $983 per year (the lowest marginal tax rate of 15% with $6,554 in interest that is no longer deductible). It is alleged that this will make a substantial dent in the Federal Budget Deficit, allow low-income and moderate-income homeowners to keep their full deduction (for principal amounts under $140,000), and allow wealthier homeowners to keep part of their tax break." Of course this means more tax for the rich, something that would be resisted by the Republican Party and other hired agents of the wealthy. Unfortunately partisan politics got us here and prevents ANY solution to the problem. Any discussion on the nation's finances MUST include Health Care....the largest and fastest growing cost to all levels of government and Americans . What do we think of Vermont's move to single payer as a huge cost saver? Agricultural subsidies? Back ground From the Cato Institute http://www.downsizinggovernment.org/agriculture/subsidies " Agriculture Would Thrive without Subsidies. It is normal for people to fear economic change, but many industries have been radically reformed in recent decades with positive results, including the airline, trucking, telecommunications, and energy industries. If farm subsidies were ended, and agriculture markets deregulated and open to entrepreneurs, farming would change—different crops would be planted, land usage would change, and some farms would go bankrupt. But a stronger and more innovative industry would likely emerge having greater resilience to shocks and downturns. Interestingly, producers of most U.S. agricultural commodities do not receive regular subsidies from the federal government. In fact, commodities that are eligible for federal subsidies account for 36 percent of U.S. farm production, while commodities that generally survive without subsidies, including meats, poultry, fruits, and vegetables, account for 64 percent of production.32 And, of course, most other U.S. industries prosper without the sort of government coddling that farmers receive. Another point to consider is that farm households are much more diversified today and better able to deal with market fluctuations. Many farm households these days earn the bulk of their income from nonfarm sources, which creates financial stability. USDA figures show that only 38 percent of farm households consider farming their primary occupation." From Wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agricultural_subsidy "Impact of subsidies Farm subsidies have the direct effect of transferring income from the general tax payers to farm owners. The justification for this transfer and its effects are complex and often controversial." From a Canadian source.....perhaps biased as the study group is funded by the Canadian dairy industry However they claim $180 BILLION US in subsidies. http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/economy/economy-lab/daily-mix/for-us-farmers-subsidies-the-best-cash-crop/article1813425/ "A new report finds that $62 of every $100 that U.S. farmers earn comes from one level of government or another. In 2009, that added up to a staggering $180.8-billion (U.S.). “The U.S. continues to provide massive -- sometimes unreported to the World Trade Organization -- support at the federal, state and local government level to U.S. agriculture,” said Ottawa trade consultant Peter Clark, who wrote the report for the Dairy Farmers of Canada. The report identified a number of indirect subsidies to U.S. farmers via programs for irrigation, export credits, nutrition food aid and loan guarantees. Nearly $20-billion of the $180.8-billion flows to U.S. dairy farmers, or fully half of their revenues, according to Mr. Clark." Why is this not a talked about issue?....politics. Subsidies for votes. Here are some of my posts on this thread alone. Perhaps the lies about me only posting links can stop? I post opinion and links to back it up. Edited October 5, 2011 by Aces Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickF1011 Posted October 5, 2011 Share Posted October 5, 2011 Seem like the right wingers don't like being called right wingers...perhaps a different name...Tea people.?....Closed minded?...non readers?...afraid to hear different opinion people?..... Republicans?......Libertarians?....... willfully ignorant?................. It is funny how far some will go to avoid having someone disagree with them. When these topics were in the Ford Employees section (where they belonged) some people who did not like to see others express their opinion whined and complained till they were moved here and now some would like all ides sanitized so they could appear on the Rush Limbaugh show. Why do these Libertarians hate free speech? Well, since you like using blanket terms. Let's tell you where I stand on some things: I am favor of eliminating tax loopholes. I am in favor of shrinking the federal government. I am in favor of stronger border security. I am pro-choice. I believe in some forms of gun control. I support marijuana legalization. I believe in a strong military. I support some forms of government oversight on business. I believe in the complete separation of church and state. Feel free to ask me my position on anything else while we're at it. I'll gladly share...AND explain why. Am I "right winger"? That's why such terms should not be used. You can say "those who don't believe in this particular point I am making", but simply labeling anyone who disagrees with that particular point with one label, you instantly label them as someone who disagrees with everything else you might say as well, which is ridiculous. I will disagree with you on some things and agree with you on others, but if I disagree with you on one point and you label me a "right winger", I'm going to be far less inclined to want to defend your perspective when I do agree with you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickF1011 Posted October 5, 2011 Share Posted October 5, 2011 Agricultural subsidies? Back ground From the Cato Institute http://www.downsizin...lture/subsidies " Agriculture Would Thrive without Subsidies. It is normal for people to fear economic change, but many industries have been radically reformed in recent decades with positive results, including the airline, trucking, telecommunications, and energy industries. If farm subsidies were ended, and agriculture markets deregulated and open to entrepreneurs, farming would change—different crops would be planted, land usage would change, and some farms would go bankrupt. But a stronger and more innovative industry would likely emerge having greater resilience to shocks and downturns. Interestingly, producers of most U.S. agricultural commodities do not receive regular subsidies from the federal government. In fact, commodities that are eligible for federal subsidies account for 36 percent of U.S. farm production, while commodities that generally survive without subsidies, including meats, poultry, fruits, and vegetables, account for 64 percent of production.32 And, of course, most other U.S. industries prosper without the sort of government coddling that farmers receive. Another point to consider is that farm households are much more diversified today and better able to deal with market fluctuations. Many farm households these days earn the bulk of their income from nonfarm sources, which creates financial stability. USDA figures show that only 38 percent of farm households consider farming their primary occupation." From Wikipedia http://en.wikipedia....ultural_subsidy "Impact of subsidies Farm subsidies have the direct effect of transferring income from the general tax payers to farm owners. The justification for this transfer and its effects are complex and often controversial." From a Canadian source.....perhaps biased as the study group is funded by the Canadian dairy industry However they claim $180 BILLION US in subsidies. http://www.theglobea...article1813425/ "A new report finds that $62 of every $100 that U.S. farmers earn comes from one level of government or another. In 2009, that added up to a staggering $180.8-billion (U.S.). “The U.S. continues to provide massive -- sometimes unreported to the World Trade Organization -- support at the federal, state and local government level to U.S. agriculture,” said Ottawa trade consultant Peter Clark, who wrote the report for the Dairy Farmers of Canada. The report identified a number of indirect subsidies to U.S. farmers via programs for irrigation, export credits, nutrition food aid and loan guarantees. Nearly $20-billion of the $180.8-billion flows to U.S. dairy farmers, or fully half of their revenues, according to Mr. Clark." Why is this not a talked about issue?....politics. Subsidies for votes. You are proving our point here. Out of 30+ lines of "your" posts, only 6 of them are something you actually thought and typed yourself. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xr7g428 Posted October 5, 2011 Share Posted October 5, 2011 Well, since you like using blanket terms. Let's tell you where I stand on some things: I am favor of eliminating tax loopholes. I am in favor of shrinking the federal government. I am in favor of stronger border security. I am pro-choice. I believe in some forms of gun control. I support marijuana legalization. I believe in a strong military. I support some forms of government oversight on business. I believe in the complete separation of church and state. Feel free to ask me my position on anything else while we're at it. I'll gladly share...AND explain why. Imagine that, Nick doesn't fall into any particular group 100%... LOL! I would suggest this is by far more common than it is unusual. If there is any group that seems to lack any kind of name it would be the social liberal / fiscal conservative. The libertarians take things a bit too far in advocating things like elimination of public schools and legalization of all drugs and firearms. The Religious right is a bit too worried about who is sleeping with whom and figuring out when life begins, and so many things that to me seem to be nobody's business but the individual. The Liberal Left seems a bit too happy to ignore property rights while pushing s special form of censorship in the form of public correctness. If I get beat up and robbed by some one what difference is it to me whether they did it because of religious belief, racism, or greed? Do the motives really make criminal acts more or less criminal? (I can understand premeditation and conspiracy, because they can modify the coldblooded-ness of any criminal act. but they do not speak to motivation) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickF1011 Posted October 5, 2011 Share Posted October 5, 2011 Imagine that, Nick doesn't fall into any particular group 100%... LOL! I would suggest this is by far more common than it is unusual. If there is any group that seems to lack any kind of name it would be the social liberal / fiscal conservative. The libertarians take things a bit too far in advocating things like elimination of public schools and legalization of all drugs and firearms. The Religious right is a bit too worried about who is sleeping with whom and figuring out when life begins, and so many things that to me seem to be nobody's business but the individual. The Liberal Left seems a bit too happy to ignore property rights while pushing s special form of censorship in the form of public correctness. If I get beat up and robbed by some one what difference is it to me whether they did it because of religious belief, racism, or greed? Do the motives really make criminal acts more or less criminal? (I can understand premeditation and conspiracy, because they can modify the coldblooded-ness of any criminal act. but they do not speak to motivation) Sounds like we're very much on the same page. And as such I refuse to affiliate myself with any current political party. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FiredMotorCompany Posted October 5, 2011 Share Posted October 5, 2011 Sounds like we're very much on the same page. And as such I refuse to affiliate myself with any current political party. All I ask, Mr. Moderator, is to let debate rule. I just ask restraint, in all fairness, in that you wear a separate hat, when Moderating, from the one that rules your political leanings. I hope it is not used to further your personal views. Rather, to maintain civility. Otherwise, please participate as an individual instead of a moderator. Else, assertions of political bias will run rampant. Thank you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickF1011 Posted October 5, 2011 Share Posted October 5, 2011 All I ask, Mr. Moderator, is to let debate rule. I just ask restraint, in all fairness, in that you wear a separate hat, when Moderating, from the one that rules your political leanings. I hope it is not used to further your personal views. Rather, to maintain civility. Otherwise, please participate as an individual instead of a moderator. Else, assertions of political bias will run rampant. Thank you. Only things I will be editing will be attacks of a personal nature and *ahem* link bombs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aces Posted October 5, 2011 Share Posted October 5, 2011 You are proving our point here. Out of 30+ lines of "your" posts, only 6 of them are something you actually thought and typed yourself. I see you left out most of my post ...how convenient. How about these lines? We need to look at entitlements...but not just individual ones. Why do we subsidize certain things? Both through direct subsidies and "tax expenditures"? Do we need to subsidize big oil, big agriculture, rich peoples mortgage interest etc? If subsidies were targeted to increase the tax base (job creation) and were short term they might be worthwhile. Why is mortgage interest deductible? Why does ethanol get subsidized and lower our MPG? Why do highly profitable oil companies need a tax break and a depletion allowance? Why do huge agriculture corporations need a subsidy since the Reagan days? Why do corporate jet owners need a subsidy? I'm sure I missed many more. Obviously you see what you want. Many posters here post links The Obama's failure thread is full of links...some really dumb ones too....but that is OK? Why did you leave that thread with all of the insults to the President? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aces Posted October 5, 2011 Share Posted October 5, 2011 (edited) All I ask, Mr. Moderator, is to let debate rule. I just ask restraint, in all fairness, in that you wear a separate hat, when Moderating, from the one that rules your political leanings. I hope it is not used to further your personal views. Rather, to maintain civility. Otherwise, please participate as an individual instead of a moderator. Else, assertions of political bias will run rampant. Thank you. This is why these threads should be in the employees section. Edited October 5, 2011 by Aces Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.