xxxrayted

Cleveland, OH

#28012 Apr 29, 2014
Anonymous of Indy wrote:
<quoted text>your dreaming again.
Nah. Canton just has selective memory.
Canton

Canton, OH

#28013 Apr 29, 2014
xxxrayted wrote:
<quoted text>
So that's your argument? Comparing your Vietnam friend to all those people walking around your neighborhood all day and night long? Hey, maybe all of them were in Vietnam.
No, but they all have jobs. Even though there was a drive by 2 houses down from mine, everyone in my neighborhood is working. Strange. You must be viewing things through tinted colored glasses. In you conservatives case, special emphasis on the "colored" part.
Canton

Canton, OH

#28014 Apr 29, 2014
xxxrayted wrote:
<quoted text>
Yeah, I guess we can say the Republican Congress the most ineffective since it is they alone that pass bills that never goes to the Senate or President. But I have to ask, what did Republicans block that was in the nations best interest? More spending?
Do you mean besides shutting down the government? Guess they taped your mouth shut and tied your hands back when Bush went a spending. Don't remember spending being such an issue with you guys, back when we had a white president. How's paying for that unpaid for Medicare expansion Bush past doing you? That outrage must be buried under more important things like birth certificates or fighting for your love of all things crude oil.
Canton

Canton, OH

#28015 Apr 29, 2014
oops passed not past, although both
xxxrayted

Cleveland, OH

#28016 Apr 29, 2014
Canton wrote:
<quoted text>
Do you mean besides shutting down the government? Guess they taped your mouth shut and tied your hands back when Bush went a spending. Don't remember spending being such an issue with you guys, back when we had a white president. How's paying for that unpaid for Medicare expansion Bush past doing you? That outrage must be buried under more important things like birth certificates or fighting for your love of all things crude oil.
Then you don't remember very well. Conservatives were Bush's worst enemy especially when it came to spending. Establishment Republicans may have supported the Republican Congresses spending but not TP or conservatives. We were Bush's worst critic on many occasions.

Oh, and BTW, as I explained numerous times, the Republican Congress did not shut down the government. They don't have that kind of power.
Pops

Cincinnati, OH

#28017 Apr 29, 2014
Old Guy wrote:
<quoted text>
"Here’s just a short list of some of the bills that Republicans have blocked, or attempted to block, since Obama became President:
Tax on Companies that ship jobs overseas- A bill that would have eliminated a tax break that companies get when they ship jobs overseas. Republicans blocked this, allowing companies to keep the tax break they receive when they ship jobs to other countries.
Political Ad disclosure bill- Would have required all donors to political campaigns to reveal themselves. Republicans blocked this, not once but twice.
Subpoena Power for the Committee investigating the BP Oil Spill – Give subpoena power to the independent committee responsible for investigating BP’s roll in the oil spill. Republicans attempted to block this.
The Small Business Jobs Act -would give LOCAL, community banks access to billions of dollars to loan to small businesses. Republicans blocked this, then attempted to block it a second time and failed.
The DREAM Act- Gives immigrant youth who were brought here as children a path to citizenship by earning a college degree or serving the military for 2 years. Republicans blocked this.
Repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell”- Would have repealed the law that forces gay and lesbian services members to lie about their sexuality and gives the military the right to discharge soldiers based on their sexuality. Republicans blocked this many times and Democrats were finally able to pass it with the support of just 2 Republicans."
http://www.addictinginfo.org/2011/01/03/bills...
Interesting post. Good points too.
I would like to comment on some of those points.
I ask, what justification is there to tax a company for taking jobs off shore? The vast majority of companies have stock holders & IF they can't make some sort of profit, those companies would tank. That would ripple through the stock market & thus the national economy via unemployment either way. No simple upside on that one.
IF that company makes widgets on shore that sell for $5 but from off shore they cost $3, which would sell?
So there is a 'suggestion' to penalize a company for providing a lower cost product for any & every U.S. consumer? I don't understand that. Politics there.
On the flip side, I can not agree with tax breaks for going off shore. That's dumb!
I am struggling some what with the Dream Act so I'll pass on that one.
The Political Disclosure act. I suggest that BOTH parties were playing politics with the public on that one because I haven't seen a politician yet that would pass up money. Heck, That is why we have so many 'career politicians'. Maybe an individual politician but NOT the group as a whole.
xxxrayted

Cleveland, OH

#28018 Apr 29, 2014
Canton wrote:
<quoted text>
No, but they all have jobs. Even though there was a drive by 2 houses down from mine, everyone in my neighborhood is working. Strange. You must be viewing things through tinted colored glasses. In you conservatives case, special emphasis on the "colored" part.
So what you're trying to tell me is that even though we have similar neighborhoods, all the hoodlums in your neighborhood are working? How do they continue their employment being locked up in jail all the time? How do they wake up for work in the morning when they are out all night until 2:00 am committing crimes?

Your high-crime area must be different than everybody else's.
xxxrayted

Cleveland, OH

#28019 Apr 29, 2014
Pops wrote:
<quoted text> Interesting post. Good points too.
I would like to comment on some of those points.
I ask, what justification is there to tax a company for taking jobs off shore? The vast majority of companies have stock holders & IF they can't make some sort of profit, those companies would tank. That would ripple through the stock market & thus the national economy via unemployment either way. No simple upside on that one.
IF that company makes widgets on shore that sell for $5 but from off shore they cost $3, which would sell?
Let me just post something here when it comes to this phony tax cut thing for offshoring:

FULL QUESTION:

When Democratic presidential candidates talk about tax breaks for corporations that ship our jobs overseas and tax breaks and subsidies for oil companies, what are they referring to and are they accurate?

FULL ANSWER:

It’s true that Sens. Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama have associated the transfer of U.S. jobs overseas with tax breaks, or loopholes, for companies that practice off-shoring:

Both candidates are referring to a feature of the U.S. tax code that allows domestic companies to defer taxes on “unrepatriated income.” In other words, revenue that companies earn through their overseas subsidiaries goes untaxed by the IRS as long as it stays off the company’s U.S. books.

But economists, including left-leaning ones, do not agree that eliminating this provision will bring an end to off-shoring. And here’s why: In the U.S., companies are taxed 35 percent on earnings of $10 million to $15 million or on all earnings over $18.3 million. That’s one of the highest corporate tax rates in the world, making an overseas move somewhat attractive to companies that wish to avoid the U.S. tax rate. But that’s not the leading reason companies send jobs overseas. According to a 2005 report by the Government Accountability Office, global technological advancement, increased openness of countries such as China and India, the higher education level of foreign workers in technological fields, and the reduced cost per foreign worker are all contributing factors to off-shoring.

We first addressed this popular theme in 2004, when we reported on a John Kerry campaign ad in which he blamed President George W. Bush for providing tax incentives to companies “outsourcing” jobs overseas. At the time we found that such tax breaks, which do exist, pre-dated the Bush administration and that even Democratic-leaning economists did not support the idea that changing the corporate tax code would end the movement of jobs overseas.
Three years later, in Dec. 2007, we reported on an ad launched by a labor group in support of John Edwards. The ad implied that corporate tax breaks were responsible for the shipment of jobs overseas from an Iowa Maytag plant. We found that the jobs were actually sent to Ohio and that, again, eliminating such tax breaks would not go far in stanching the flow of jobs overseas.

http://www.factcheck.org/2008/02/oil-and-gas-...
Canton

Canton, OH

#28020 Apr 29, 2014
xxxrayted wrote:
<quoted text>
Then you don't remember very well. Conservatives were Bush's worst enemy especially when it came to spending. Establishment Republicans may have supported the Republican Congresses spending but not TP or conservatives. We were Bush's worst critic on many occasions.
Oh, and BTW, as I explained numerous times, the Republican Congress did not shut down the government. They don't have that kind of power.
What you are meaning to say is that hypothetically Conservatives were Bush's worst nightmare but unfortunately for reality, Bush played the Jesus card and had the Conservatives eating out of his hand like little baby deer. In fact, you guys didn't start playing the whole "I don't trust either side" gig until deep into Bush's second term, when it was apparent to the entire nation that people's poor political choices had sunk our nation. This you guys only did as a ploy to distance yourself from a president that was astronomically worse than Barack Obama and an administration that makes any faults of our current one look like Mother Teresa accidentally dropping a spoon.
Canton

Canton, OH

#28021 Apr 29, 2014
xxxrayted wrote:
<quoted text>
So what you're trying to tell me is that even though we have similar neighborhoods, all the hoodlums in your neighborhood are working? How do they continue their employment being locked up in jail all the time? How do they wake up for work in the morning when they are out all night until 2:00 am committing crimes?
Your high-crime area must be different than everybody else's.
My neighborhood is full of working people who are over 30. What their kids do at night is anyone's guess. The only problem houses we have are renters that were created during the GW years. Maybe you just have special glasses that allow you to see all those hoodlums in the dark. Me having a Viet Nam vet friend in the neighborhood doesn't hurt, I must admit. Let's just say he's a night owl with "territorial" issues. Me personally have a 220lb Great Pyrenees dog that literally blurs my computer screen when he is next to me and barks. The thing is huge and very capable of shredding the baddest of them. A couple pistols and a shotgun and I sleep like a baby. Maybe my neighbors and I are the real hoodlums and that's why nobody messes with us. We have all lived here awhile. How long have you lived in your neighborhood?
Canton

Canton, OH

#28022 Apr 29, 2014
xxxrayted wrote:
<quoted text>
Let me just post something here when it comes to this phony tax cut thing for offshoring:
FULL QUESTION:
When Democratic presidential candidates talk about tax breaks for corporations that ship our jobs overseas and tax breaks and subsidies for oil companies, what are they referring to and are they accurate?
FULL ANSWER:
It’s true that Sens. Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama have associated the transfer of U.S. jobs overseas with tax breaks, or loopholes, for companies that practice off-shoring:
Both candidates are referring to a feature of the U.S. tax code that allows domestic companies to defer taxes on “unrepatriated income.” In other words, revenue that companies earn through their overseas subsidiaries goes untaxed by the IRS as long as it stays off the company’s U.S. books.
But economists, including left-leaning ones, do not agree that eliminating this provision will bring an end to off-shoring. And here’s why: In the U.S., companies are taxed 35 percent on earnings of $10 million to $15 million or on all earnings over $18.3 million. That’s one of the highest corporate tax rates in the world, making an overseas move somewhat attractive to companies that wish to avoid the U.S. tax rate. But that’s not the leading reason companies send jobs overseas. According to a 2005 report by the Government Accountability Office, global technological advancement, increased openness of countries such as China and India, the higher education level of foreign workers in technological fields, and the reduced cost per foreign worker are all contributing factors to off-shoring.
We first addressed this popular theme in 2004, when we reported on a John Kerry campaign ad in which he blamed President George W. Bush for providing tax incentives to companies “outsourcing” jobs overseas. At the time we found that such tax breaks, which do exist, pre-dated the Bush administration and that even Democratic-leaning economists did not support the idea that changing the corporate tax code would end the movement of jobs overseas.
Three years later, in Dec. 2007, we reported on an ad launched by a labor group in support of John Edwards. The ad implied that corporate tax breaks were responsible for the shipment of jobs overseas from an Iowa Maytag plant. We found that the jobs were actually sent to Ohio and that, again, eliminating such tax breaks would not go far in stanching the flow of jobs overseas.
http://www.factcheck.org/2008/02/oil-and-gas-...
Factcheck, I see. I am impressed. If this were D&D, you would have just went up a level in Sources skill.
Canton

Canton, OH

#28023 Apr 29, 2014
http://s1.hubimg.com/u/7398386_f248.jpg

Although this is not my Great Pyrenees, his paws are that big. When you hold him up, he can look you in the eyes. When he is being aggressive, the hair on his back stands up and it's all you can do to hold him back on his leash. He's not exactly what you would want to see if you were climbing in a window to rob the place. He is huge even for his breed and isn't fat at all. 220lbs and very wolf like in build. When we looked up the world record, he didn't look any bigger than the beast we have lumbering around our home. Could it be that I have discovered a topic that no one can argue over? Who doesn't like dogs?
Old Guy

Cincinnati, OH

#28024 Apr 29, 2014
Old Guy wrote:
<quoted text>
Political Ad disclosure bill- Would have required all donors to political campaigns to reveal themselves. Republicans blocked this, not once but twice.

http://www.addictinginfo.org/2011/01/03/bills...
Pops wrote:
<quoted text>
The Political Disclosure act. I suggest that BOTH parties were playing politics with the public on that one because I haven't seen a politician yet that would pass up money. Heck, That is why we have so many 'career politicians'. Maybe an individual politician but NOT the group as a whole.
But why do you think that the Republicans want to conceal where the money comes from in our political campaigns? How does that benefit the American public?
Dragon Slayer

Waverly, OH

#28025 Apr 30, 2014
I do NOT support someone who loves corrupt officials in office and cover up murder of Mothers, abuse of elders, to steal their estates. While he lets people serve in office with ON oath or bond.,..
http://eldermurderabuseandexploitation.blogsp...

“Meh.”

Since: Aug 10

Location hidden

#28026 Apr 30, 2014
Dragon Slayer wrote:
I do NOT support someone who loves corrupt officials in office and cover up murder of Mothers, abuse of elders, to steal their estates. While he lets people serve in office with ON oath or bond.,..
http://eldermurderabuseandexploitation.blogsp...
For anyone else who hasn't had their morning coffee yet, this link supplies 100% of your RDA of crazy. Wow.
xxxrayted

Cleveland, OH

#28027 Apr 30, 2014
Canton wrote:
<quoted text>
Factcheck, I see. I am impressed. If this were D&D, you would have just went up a level in Sources skill.
I don't know who D&D is, but I try to use left-leaning or left-wing sources when making a point. That way I don't have to put up with this "OH, it's Fox" nonsense. The only time liberals partly trust anything is if it's from one of their own. If the information comes from anything center or right of center, it's automatically dismissed as unreliable even though nobody can prove the source incorrect.

Saves a lot of time.
xxxrayted

Cleveland, OH

#28028 Apr 30, 2014
Canton wrote:
http://s1.hubimg.com/u/7398386 _f248.jpg
Although this is not my Great Pyrenees, his paws are that big. When you hold him up, he can look you in the eyes. When he is being aggressive, the hair on his back stands up and it's all you can do to hold him back on his leash. He's not exactly what you would want to see if you were climbing in a window to rob the place. He is huge even for his breed and isn't fat at all. 220lbs and very wolf like in build. When we looked up the world record, he didn't look any bigger than the beast we have lumbering around our home. Could it be that I have discovered a topic that no one can argue over? Who doesn't like dogs?
Cats?
xxxrayted

Cleveland, OH

#28029 Apr 30, 2014
Canton wrote:
<quoted text>
My neighborhood is full of working people who are over 30. What their kids do at night is anyone's guess. The only problem houses we have are renters that were created during the GW years. Maybe you just have special glasses that allow you to see all those hoodlums in the dark. Me having a Viet Nam vet friend in the neighborhood doesn't hurt, I must admit. Let's just say he's a night owl with "territorial" issues. Me personally have a 220lb Great Pyrenees dog that literally blurs my computer screen when he is next to me and barks. The thing is huge and very capable of shredding the baddest of them. A couple pistols and a shotgun and I sleep like a baby. Maybe my neighbors and I are the real hoodlums and that's why nobody messes with us. We have all lived here awhile. How long have you lived in your neighborhood?
I've been here nearly 30 years. I've owned the place the last 21 of those years. I've been witness to the terrible changes that took place. I remember when this neighborhood was so nice that you could safely walk down any street at 2:00 am.

Even tough the neighborhood was going downhill at a slow pace, it's the housing bubble that killed us. It sped things up ten times faster. All the inner-city lowlifes moved in our suburb because they didn't have a pot to pzz in or a window to throw it out of, but they were able to get home loans with no money down and no credit check.

Along with them came the crime. We went from one murder every ten or fifteen years to three a year. The lowlifes brought their kids into our school system and ruined that. Good people moved out. Because banks were giving out loans to anybody, it made it almost impossible for us landlords; supply and demand. We had to lower our prices and take anybody we thought might be able to make rent. These new homeowners were mostly renters.

After the banks caught up with their foreclosures, it sent many of the lowlifes back into the city. But like a tornado, once the damage is done, it's very difficult if not impossible to rebuild.
Reality Speaks

Columbus, OH

#28030 Apr 30, 2014
Canton wrote:
<quoted text>
Do you mean besides shutting down the government? Guess they taped your mouth shut and tied your hands back when Bush went a spending. Don't remember spending being such an issue with you guys, back when we had a white president. How's paying for that unpaid for Medicare expansion Bush past doing you? That outrage must be buried under more important things like birth certificates or fighting for your love of all things crude oil.
shutting down the government was Harry Reid, and that is fact.

and cutting the government spending in half will be what occurs after next election cycle.

only loons like printing money devaluing the dollar, and borrowing the countries future to support those who can't support themselves because they refuse to apply themselves.

the real question is when are you going to start paying your share?

Watching you implode this November will be great fun.......carry on.
Reality Speaks

Columbus, OH

#28031 Apr 30, 2014
Pope Che Reagan Christ I wrote:
<quoted text>
THERE'S the old Walter we have come to know and love. You left out "ilk," but all and all not too shabby.
you are just mad you can't keep up.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Brook Park Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Ravenna roller rink urged by CARE Apr 22 smarterthanCARE 1
News William W. Stawicki Mar 28 DBozzie 1
Poll Mystic Creek Apartments, good or bad? (May '08) Mar '15 CryingDolphin 15
News Police: Party patrons beat Chuck E. Cheese workers Mar '15 Sterkfontein Swar... 1
News Pandrangi Tower will open soon at Southwest Gen... (Oct '14) Oct '14 Ivieivy 1
News Revamped Brook Park Home Days haven't drawn or ... (Jul '14) Jul '14 tim 1
News Facing another deficit, Brook Park leaders cons... (Mar '14) Mar '14 Ted 1
More from around the web

Brook Park People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]