Did you vote today?

Did you vote today?

Created by Rick on Jun 8, 2010

6,407 votes

Click on an option to vote

Yes

No

Other (explain below)

Since: Dec 10

Kansas City Ks.

#18963 Dec 3, 2012
BarneyIII wrote:
<quoted text>
You have to have your mittens marked left and right and you want us to believe that you are able to analyze others, your being delusional.
Speaking of "delusional", did or did you not guarantee that "mittens" would be the next President of the United States.


hmmmm

Brookland, AR

#18964 Dec 3, 2012
Redd wrote:
<quoted text>
Not blinded at all, this is Topic's... you know, the place where teenage girls and welfare mothers most intimate details are discussed with relish.
lol. I digress, well said.

Since: Dec 10

Kansas City Ks.

#18965 Dec 3, 2012
Reality Check wrote:
<quoted text>
Abortion and birth control are no more than vehicles used to sensationalize issues for uninformed voters and to demonize those opposed to it. It gives the uninformed something to fight for that is not as boring as budget issues and fiscal cliffs. What's sad is that it actually works on our voting public.
Damn shame not all the voting public, is not smart, well informed, wealthy business owners of high moral value, as you?
dont know nothin

Benton City, WA

#18966 Dec 3, 2012
Reality Check wrote:
<quoted text>
By your post, I can only assume that you are an accountant or something tax related. You would have to be to make a post like the one above, though I bet you are not in any field close to a tax professional. That means you know no more than I do yet you wouldn't know that from your posts. The other thing is that your post is a great argument for my point of view. You posted a CBO report from Feb 2012 and then said things have changed. That must mean that report no longer is valid. You then stick with the argument that $4 trillion is the magic number even though you admit things have changed. Hey, at least that number didn't change as it has in your past couple of posts. You said that I am looking at all the wrong numbers...THEY WERE THE NUMBERS YOU GAVE ME!!! I don't even think those numbers are correct. I just used them so you wouldn't have a complaint, yet here you are. "Trained professionals" is who have been figuring this out for decades and where has that gotten us? BTW, I am completely happy with my career choice and want nothing to do with the tax code but a fifth grader that has a simple lemonade stand and a calculator could easily see that the path we are on is unsustainable. Let's just wait and see how it plays out. My guess is that the situation will "change" again giving you a completely different argument to make.
look.. the magic number is still 4t as a goal.. but we will probably fall a little short of that number .. and the numbers i gave you were correct .. but you were not taking in all the underlying changes and factors that have came with time and are still to come.. republicans thank goodness have proposed their bill and now the 2 need to just mesh out their differences and come to a compromise with common ground.. and i garuntee it is not just as black and white as everyone thinks it is .. there are alot of circumstances, consequences, and factors that play into balancing and budgeting any nations economy.. it's not as simple as balancing a bank account
Reality Check

United States

#18967 Dec 3, 2012
BARNEYII wrote:
<quoted text>
Damn shame not all the voting public, is not smart, well informed, wealthy business owners of high moral value, as you?
Whatever.
Reality Check

United States

#18968 Dec 3, 2012
dont know nothin wrote:
<quoted text>look.. the magic number is still 4t as a goal.. but we will probably fall a little short of that number .. and the numbers i gave you were correct .. but you were not taking in all the underlying changes and factors that have came with time and are still to come.. republicans thank goodness have proposed their bill and now the 2 need to just mesh out their differences and come to a compromise with common ground.. and i garuntee it is not just as black and white as everyone thinks it is .. there are alot of circumstances, consequences, and factors that play into balancing and budgeting any nations economy.. it's not as simple as balancing a bank account
Oh it is that simple. Politicians just make it more complex than that. You simply predict the revenue based on previous years, prioritize spending, if there is not enough revenue to account for all spending either adjust spending levels to fit more programs in or simply cut programs out all together that are not absolutely necessary. If more revenue is taken in than is anticipated, you simply look to add some of the fringe programs that didn't make the cut in the previous year. It's exactly like a business budget. Now, I understand that is not the way it happens now. Politicians face way too many hands that are being held out looking for kickback pieces of legislation for their cause or state or whatever. It's not the politicians money anyway so they don't care. If it was their money, we wouldn't be in the spot we are in.
Redd

Maumelle, AR

#18969 Dec 4, 2012
hmmmm wrote:
<quoted text>lol. I digress, well said.
For starting this mess of a thread I should receive a nickle a post...or tarred and feathered and ran out of town.
BarneyIII

Jonesboro, AR

#18970 Dec 4, 2012
BARNEYII wrote:
<quoted text>
Speaking of "delusional", did or did you not guarantee that "mittens" would be the next President of the United States.
I did not, actually put my bet on your hero. People will nearly always vote for the person telling them what they want to hear, not what they need to hear, therefore Obama was a safe bet (for the wager, not the country)
BarneyIII

Jonesboro, AR

#18971 Dec 4, 2012
BARNEYII wrote:
<quoted text>
Damn shame not all the voting public, is not smart, well informed, wealthy business owners of high moral value, as you?
Finally something we can agree on.
Reality Check

United States

#18972 Dec 4, 2012
dont know nothin wrote:
<quoted text>look.. the magic number is still 4t as a goal.. but we will probably fall a little short of that number .. and the numbers i gave you were correct .. but you were not taking in all the underlying changes and factors that have came with time and are still to come.. republicans thank goodness have proposed their bill and now the 2 need to just mesh out their differences and come to a compromise with common ground.. and i garuntee it is not just as black and white as everyone thinks it is .. there are alot of circumstances, consequences, and factors that play into balancing and budgeting any nations economy.. it's not as simple as balancing a bank account
Just so you know, the republican offer is no better than Obama's. It's equally as pathetic and a smoke screen. Again, the politicians know that if they throw out big numbers, reguardless of how long it takes to reach that number, then the public will eat it up and they are right. They even have people like you arguing for them that the formula is too complex for it to be a matter of simple addition and subtraction. Most others have no clue and don't really care as long as they can get through this day without a disaster that takes everything they have. They think that if this day is ok then why would any other day be not ok. It's embarrassing.

Since: Dec 10

Kansas City Ks.

#18973 Dec 4, 2012
BarneyIII wrote:
<quoted text>
Finally something we can agree on.
For you to agree with me on that is self-loathing on your part.

MY meaning was, my opinion of him is, he is a self righteous,
Republican propaganda believing, wind bag.


Yes, we agree, you do fit into that category.


guest

United States

#18974 Dec 4, 2012
dont know nothin wrote:
you cannot have increased revenue without increased taxes so let the compromising begin!!!
Tell that to the British who passed a High Earner surtax similar to what Obama wants. How did it work? According to the British Treasurey:

"The Treasury received £10.35 billion in income tax payments from those paying by self-assessment last month, a drop of £509 million compared with January 2011. Most other taxes produced higher revenues over the same period."

That facts simply don't support your argument...

Since: Dec 10

Kansas City Ks.

#18975 Dec 4, 2012
BarneyIII wrote:
<quoted text>
I did not, actually put my bet on your hero. People will nearly always vote for the person telling them what they want to hear, not what they need to hear, therefore Obama was a safe bet (for the wager, not the country)
WTF, do the odds have to do with whether or not you made such an asinine prediction?

What is the matter, don't you have enough courage, to give a yes or no answer on an anonymous web site of all places?


BarneyIII

Jonesboro, AR

#18976 Dec 4, 2012
BARNEYII wrote:
<quoted text>
For you to agree with me on that is self-loathing on your part.
MY meaning was, my opinion of him is, he is a self righteous,
Republican propaganda believing, wind bag.
Yes, we agree, you do fit into that category.
No, we agree that you have low self esteem and are threatened by anyone you perceive to be smarter so you constantly attack just about everyone. Yes, that is something that we agree on.
BarneyIII

Jonesboro, AR

#18977 Dec 4, 2012
BARNEYII wrote:
<quoted text>
WTF, do the odds have to do with whether or not you made such an asinine prediction?
What is the matter, don't you have enough courage, to give a yes or no answer on an anonymous web site of all places?
You are an idiot. It was very clear that I was stating that I never said that Obama would lose the election. You need to stop sniffing the grease in the deep fryers and try to relate to the world around you. I was simply stating that there are a sufficient number of voters such as yourself, that lack the initiative to support themselves and doubt their abilities to make their own decisions and need a government to provide cradle to grave protection. I don't blame you, if you were more capable, you would be more optimistic about your ability to exist without the government doing all things for you. And lucky for you, there are enough of us left to provide for you for awhile longer.

Since: Dec 10

Kansas City Ks.

#18978 Dec 4, 2012
guest wrote:
<quoted text>Tell that to the British who passed a High Earner surtax similar to what Obama wants. How did it work? According to the British Treasurey:
"The Treasury received £10.35 billion in income tax payments from those paying by self-assessment last month, a drop of £509 million compared with January 2011. Most other taxes produced higher revenues over the same period."
That facts simply don't support your argument...
Let me break this down for you, notice it said "self-assessment",

"Senior sources said that the first official figures indicated that there had been “maneuvering” by well-off Britons to avoid the new higher rate."

Now, to continue shooting yourself in the foot, your story also says,

"Most other taxes produced higher revenues over the same period"

With that proven fact, there is no evidence that a higher tax rate harmed commerce.

Since: Dec 10

Kansas City Ks.

#18979 Dec 4, 2012
BarneyIII wrote:
<quoted text>
No, we agree that you have low self esteem and are threatened by anyone you perceive to be smarter so you constantly attack just about everyone. Yes, that is something that we agree on.
You really should seek help for these regular bouts of schizophrenia, you and you, are experiencing.

Do we agree on that?
BarneyIII

Jonesboro, AR

#18980 Dec 4, 2012
BARNEYII wrote:
<quoted text>
You really should seek help for these regular bouts of schizophrenia, you and you, are experiencing.
Do we agree on that?
Reread your post, does it make sense to you, no one else either.

Since: Dec 10

Kansas City Ks.

#18981 Dec 4, 2012
BarneyIII wrote:
<quoted text>
Reread your post, does it make sense to you, no one else either.
It did, and still does make sense to me, obviously it went right over your head.

Would you like for me to explain it to you?

Since: Dec 10

Kansas City Ks.

#18982 Dec 4, 2012
BarneyIII wrote:
<quoted text>
You are an idiot. It was very clear that I was stating that I never said that Obama would lose the election. You need to stop sniffing the grease in the deep fryers and try to relate to the world around you. I was simply stating that there are a sufficient number of voters such as yourself, that lack the initiative to support themselves and doubt their abilities to make their own decisions and need a government to provide cradle to grave protection. I don't blame you, if you were more capable, you would be more optimistic about your ability to exist without the government doing all things for you. And lucky for you, there are enough of us left to provide for you for awhile longer.
So, your answer is "NO" you did not post on this thread a prediction Romney would win the election, is that correct, yes or no?

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.

El Dorado Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Ex Wife discuss Ex 20 min Friends 1
yancey kyle & dispatcher fling? 4 hr curious 2
musicfest 2017 4 hr Recruiter 8
Marriage 5 hr Advice 7
Which doctor is responsible for this? 16 hr Sick of SAMA 12
News 2017 Murphy USA Summer Concert Series Thu EldoMasterBlaster 2
Econo Lodge Thu Gets the 3

El Dorado Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

El Dorado Mortgages