Comments
56,141 - 56,160 of 140,837 Comments Last updated 2 min ago
gomer

Morristown, TN

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#61594
Jan 5, 2013
 
tinkywinky wrote:
My daddy told me to tell u its already n the bag,soo suck it up azzwipe twerps
why
Unreal

Dandridge, TN

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#61595
Jan 5, 2013
 

Judged:

2

1

1

Truth Detector wrote:
<quoted text>
But you were against drug testing for welfare and food stamps?
You do realize that at some point, "chronically unemployed" will become a disability. They are already considered a minority with special protections. We gotta do something with these people - might as well put them on disability. It'll be cheaper than extending unemployment benefits.
Are you a mind reader now too Tim? I didn't post anything even close to pertaining to drug testing for food stamps. The rest of your post is ridiculous as usual.
Dunlapian

Dunlap, TN

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#61596
Jan 5, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Local wrote:
<quoted text>
We are still getting a tax break on our income taxes. The R's insisted that this same break must extend all the way up to $450,000 per year!(They look after the rich)
What you are talking about is the temporary holiday on withholding tax (SS) Obama gave us a couple of years back to help us in the recession. So the current 4.2% withholding goes back to the usual 6.2%. Toughen up and don't be bitter about the election outcome.
It's really hard to ask a Eunuch to toughen up.......I'm sorry for that comment!
Anyhow old Limbaugh and Beck really scammed that Tea Party-Aligned group FreedomWorks for Millions of Bucks, saying they didn't get their money's worth. HA!

Since: Oct 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#61597
Jan 5, 2013
 
tinkywinky wrote:
How do u do it an easier way?all I've ever known is the hard way.
I rest my case! lol!
Unreal

Dandridge, TN

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#61598
Jan 5, 2013
 
Local wrote:
<quoted text>
We are still getting a tax break on our income taxes. The R's insisted that this same break must extend all the way up to $450,000 per year!(They look after the rich)
What you are talking about is the temporary holiday on withholding tax (SS) Obama gave us a couple of years back to help us in the recession. So the current 4.2% withholding goes back to the usual 6.2%. Toughen up and don't be bitter about the election outcome.
I may be wrong, but wasn't the original SS deduction 7.5%? If I am correct, it didn't even go back to the original deduction. So the increase is 2% or $200 on every 10K.

Since: Oct 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#61599
Jan 5, 2013
 
Unreal wrote:
<quoted text>
I don't have as big a problem with that as I so Sassy's scenario. I don't think we should be paying drug addicted parents so that they can keep their children because we all know drug addicted parents are not taking care of their kids with that money. If we really have that big a problem with drug addicted parents, then maybe it is time we open orphanages in this country because the chances of a child raised in that environment becoming productive members of society are slim, so it sounds like we are perpetuating the problem.
I said in my first post that I understand some people needing those benefits. I have seen several that I don't think fit that category. I know some 30 to 40 somethings that are on it because they have back pain, and will work for cash if they can find someone who will give it to them. I have back pain too... I believe the lawyer ads on TV are a good indication that we have a problem. They show those 30 to 40 somethings that are so happy that the lawyer got them "the money they deserve". No, I do not want those people and drug addicts drawing SS disability benefits!
I didn't say I agreed with it, I just posted the reason for it, from the State and Federal Gov't.'s point of view, which is MONEY. The cheaper alternative is what the Gov't. always looks for, when they really don't know what to do about a problem, just like alot of Others do, also.
If there is no acceptable solution, yet something HAS to be done, then just do the cheaper option...that's true in every situation, inside and outside of Gov't., if you think about it, even in Individual situations.

Since: Oct 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#61600
Jan 5, 2013
 
Unreal wrote:
<quoted text>
I may be wrong, but wasn't the original SS deduction 7.5%? If I am correct, it didn't even go back to the original deduction. So the increase is 2% or $200 on every 10K.
If memory serves, because I posted a Link SINCE the Fiscal Cliff Deal, telling the figures...it was originally 6.2%, before the Recession, and it went back up to 4.2%, which leaves it still 2% lower than it was before the TEMPORARY decrease due to the bad economy.
I don't remember the percentage it increased FROM, that it had been temporarily lowered to because of the bad economy.
So YES, it is STILL 2% LOWER than it was before the Recession!
Unreal

Dandridge, TN

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#61601
Jan 5, 2013
 
Really Sassy wrote:
<quoted text>
I didn't say I agreed with it, I just posted the reason for it, from the State and Federal Gov't.'s point of view, which is MONEY. The cheaper alternative is what the Gov't. always looks for, when they really don't know what to do about a problem, just like alot of Others do, also.
If there is no acceptable solution, yet something HAS to be done, then just do the cheaper option...that's true in every situation, inside and outside of Gov't., if you think about it, even in Individual situations.
I didn't think you agreed with it, but it is a sad alternative.
Willie Welfair

Dallas, TX

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#61602
Jan 5, 2013
 
Truth Detector wrote:
<quoted text>
But you were against drug testing for welfare and food stamps?
You do realize that at some point, "chronically unemployed" will become a disability. They are already considered a minority with special protections. We gotta do something with these people - might as well put them on disability. It'll be cheaper than extending unemployment benefits.
Just say NO to any testing.

Since: Oct 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#61603
Jan 5, 2013
 
Unreal wrote:
<quoted text>
I didn't think you agreed with it, but it is a sad alternative.
I agree, but when you have such a massive problem in a Society, what alternative is there? Apparently, the Gov't. doesn't know and I certainly don't.
I have a Theory about the Drug problem in this Country, that is not complimentary to the Gov't. in any way, but I don't think it's a good idea to post it because, the Conspiracy Theorists would go crazy with it and not even consider that it's just one Person's "Theory" (or possibility)...it is in no way, carved in stone!
Dunlapian

Dunlap, TN

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#61604
Jan 5, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Job Report;
GW's first term, started with 132.47 million, ended with 132.45 million- effectively zero job growth.
Obama's first term started with 133.56 million and as of Dec. it's 134.02 million, a net gain of .3%

Since: Oct 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#61605
Jan 5, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

The Economy is definitely growing, slowly but surely. Although it's not as fast as all of us would like, it is going in the right direction and as long as it doesn't reverse in the opposite direction, there's Hope that we will get there, in time!
Considering where we started, and what could have happened...I'll take it and be glad of it!
tinkywinky

United States

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#61606
Jan 5, 2013
 
Really Sassy wrote:
<quoted text>
I rest my case! lol!
lmao
sunny

La Follette, TN

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#61607
Jan 5, 2013
 
Michael jackson
Nosey Rosie

Romania

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#61608
Jan 5, 2013
 
Really Sassy wrote:
The Economy is definitely growing, slowly but surely. Although it's not as fast as all of us would like, it is going in the right direction and as long as it doesn't reverse in the opposite direction, there's Hope that we will get there, in time!
Considering where we started, and what could have happened...I'll take it and be glad of it!
The economy is definitely NOT growing,

Since: Oct 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#61609
Jan 5, 2013
 
Nosey Rosie wrote:
<quoted text>The economy is definitely NOT growing,
All of the Official Reports say otherwise.
Truth Detector

Jamestown, TN

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#61611
Jan 5, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

Dunlapian wrote:
Job Report;
GW's first term, started with 132.47 million, ended with 132.45 million- effectively zero job growth.
Obama's first term started with 133.56 million and as of Dec. it's 134.02 million, a net gain of .3%
GW's first term started with 4.2% unemployment and ended with 7.8%

Obama's first term started with 7.8% unemployment, and after hitting a high of 10%, is still mired at 7.8%, a net gain of 0%.

Of course, during the last 4 years, they've had to exclude millions of people who've given up looking for work, and are no longer included in the calculations. Otherwise, it would be about 16%.

I guess you can make statistics do whatever you want them to do.

No matter what moronic pablum you spit up, the economy still sucks, and isn't getting any better.

Proving once again, that Obama got the moron vote.

Since: Oct 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#61614
Jan 5, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

What you are not factoring in is that, the Bottom dropped out of the economy in Nov. before Bush was out of office the following Jan...less than two months later. So, Obama's first Term got the full brunt of the damage that was caused during Bush's two Terms.
Obama didn't cause it, Bush did...but the results of Bush's actions, weren't fully felt until Obama's First Term in office. They had barely started to materialize, but they had started in Nov., before Obama took office and they became fully apparent during Obama's first Term in Office.
Remember who was President and who appointed Hank Paulson, a former Goldman-Sachs CEO, to come up with the Wall St. Bailout and who told Congress that if they didn't vote it in by the following Monday, the Country would go bankrupt because because Wall Street, and the U.S. Economy would crash? Bush was the President who did all of that at the end of his Second Term, before Obama took Office. It was all a farse because Bailing out Wall street did nothing but save the Big Wall Street Bankers, but it happend on Bush's Watch, not on Obama's. It was left up to Obama to save the Country!
Bob the Buckeye

Knoxville, TN

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#61615
Jan 5, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Well, let's remember that ol' Barry stepped in and did some "saving" of his own: Government Motors ring a bell. Crapped all over the bondholders in the process also. Let's be honest about it, Barry saved the UAW, he couldn't give a rat's behind about the average worker. Here is the proof - where is your middle class tax relief. You sure didn't get it this week, your taxes went up while NASCAR got about 40-50 million in tax exemptions extended for a few of the track owners. Yeah, old Barry just loves the little guy, you should see all the pork in that "Fiscal Cliff" bill.

Since: Oct 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#61616
Jan 5, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Bob the Buckeye wrote:
Well, let's remember that ol' Barry stepped in and did some "saving" of his own: Government Motors ring a bell. Crapped all over the bondholders in the process also. Let's be honest about it, Barry saved the UAW, he couldn't give a rat's behind about the average worker. Here is the proof - where is your middle class tax relief. You sure didn't get it this week, your taxes went up while NASCAR got about 40-50 million in tax exemptions extended for a few of the track owners. Yeah, old Barry just loves the little guy, you should see all the pork in that "Fiscal Cliff" bill.
I saw it...I'm the One who posted the Article, remember?
I also posted the Article that said the Automobile Industry and the General Motors Bailout did more to save the U.S. economy than any other single action, and explained how and where they are, economically, today, world-wide, in sales. But, I guess you didn't read that one....but you should! I believe, if memory serves, it was a Forbes Article, a very Conservative Business Site, in case you don't know!

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Type in your comments below
Name
(appears on your post)
Comments
Characters left: 4000
Type the numbers you see in the image on the right:

Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" 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.

•••
•••
•••
Greeneville Dating

more search filters

less search filters

•••

Greeneville Jobs

•••
Enter and win $5000
•••
•••

Greeneville People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

•••

Greeneville News, Events & Info

Click for news, events and info in Greeneville
•••

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]
•••