Obama LIES "I'm not a Socialist" 1 of 69

[Ruth]

Female wrote:

The government can create jobs only Obama was stopped because they refused to pass his jobs bill that would have put people back to work.

Who is "they"? He had a Democrat majority in Congress when he took office.

[Big Johnson]

Ruth wrote:

<quoted text>
Oh? Where did you hear that? If it's too large, what is the right amount of disparity? And what do you think should be done to reach that amount? Just take money from the wealthy and give it to them? Do you know what happens to most big lottery winners within just a few years? Do you know why?

Tell us what happens to 'most''big' lottery winners within just a 'few' years. Back it up with facts.

[Ruth]

Big Johnson wrote:

<quoted text>
Tell us what happens to 'most''big' lottery winners within just a 'few' years. Back it up with facts.

One in three are broke within 5 years, over half within 10. Do your own homework.

(Nice avoiding the point though)

[Female]

Ruth is saying the wealthy are the smartest, have more morals and are just all around great wonderful people. The rest of us are stupid and immoral and bad people. That was a great comment Ruth.

[Female]

2007 the richest 1% of the American population owned 34.6% of the country's total wealth, and the next 19% owned 50.5%. Thus, the top 20% of Americans owned 85% of the country's wealth and the bottom 80% of the population owned 15%. Financial inequality was greater than inequality in total wealth, with the top 1% of the population owning 42.7%, the next 19% of Americans owning 50.3%, and the bottom 80% owning 7%.[8] However, after the Great Recession which started in 2007, the share of total wealth owned by the top 1% of the population grew from 34.6% to 37.1%, and that owned by the top 20% of Americans grew from 85% to 87.7%. The Great Recession also caused a drop of 36.1% in median household wealth but a drop of only 11.1% for the top 1%, further widening the gap between the 1% and the 99%.[8][9][10]

[Reality Speaks]

FKA Reader wrote:

<quoted text>
Sounds like a variation on the Romney defense.
He always paid over 13% in taxes.
But we don't know in what kind of taxes.

yes we do; but you can't figure it out because you never pay them.
The tax is called federal income tax; and Romney paid almost $3 million in income tax.

just think....3 million dollars of taxes by one man.
that is more than your entire neighborhood paid in in a decade added together.

You call Romney a crook for paying more in a year, than your neighborhood added together did in 10 years.

who is taking advantage of the system....the person who pays $3 million a year in taxes, or a neighborhood that pays ZERO?

[Get out and vote]

Big Johnson wrote:

<quoted text>
Tell us what happens to 'most''big' lottery winners within just a 'few' years. Back it up with facts.

The Curse of The Lottery: 5 Winners and Their Demise
If you won the lottery, how would you spend your money? This is a common conversation starter among friends, family and first dates. What if winning the lottery meant years of disaster and heartbreak plaguing you and your family? Would you think a little harder about the question?
The “Curse of the Lottery” is a psychological study to some, a predictable outcome to others, and an unknown phenomenon to many. Here are five examples of winners that probably wish they hadn’t won in the first place:
1. Kenneth and Connie Parker
Happily married for 16 years, Kenneth and Connie Parker quickly watched their marriage disintegrate months after they won the $25 million jackpot. According to ABC News, Kenneth’s “wife turned cold, kicked him out of the condo they had bought, and told him she was keeping all the money.” It was an abrupt ending to what seemed to be a strong marriage.
2. Michael Carroll
After winning 9.7 million British Pounds (about $15 million), Michael Carroll thought he would be set for life. Reportedly “angry at his life of excess,” his wife, Sandra, left Michael about a year after he won the jackpot and took their baby daughter Brooke with her, according to Mail Online. Now, eight years later, Carroll has squandered all of his earnings on drugs, gambling and prostitutes. He is now just as poor, if not worse off, than he was when he started.
3. Billie Bob Harrell Jr.
After winning $31 million in the Texas lottery, Billie Bob, thought he had it all. Struggling to support his wife and teenage children on his Home Depot salary, the winnings seemed a blessing to Harrell. In 1997, he and his wife celebrated in their living room after finding out they had won the jackpot. Two years later, unable to take the pressure of constantly lending money to friends and lamenting the strained relationships in his family, Harrell shot and killed himself in a bedroom at his Kingwood, Texas, home.
4. Jeffrey Dampier
Hailing from Chicago, Ill., Jeffrey Dampier was the lucky winner of a $20 million prize from his home state’s lottery in 1996. He reportedly spent most of his earnings on those around him, even sending 38 members of his family on a seven-day Carribbean cruise. His sharing didn’t stop there: He also bought houses and cars for his parents and siblings, but not everyone showed their appreciation. In 2005, Victoria Jackson, Dampier’s sister-in-law, kidnapped and murdered him, leaving his body in his truck.
5. Jack Whittaker
At the time of his lottery victory, Jack Whittaker had the highest jackpot ever in the American lottery, with a single ticket at $315 million in the Powerball multi-state lottery. After he won, Whittaker donated a lot of money to churches and charities, but this did not stop the curse from following him. First,$545,000 in cash was stolen from his car while Whittaker was at a strip club. A second time $200,000 was stolen and later recovered. These problems were minor compared to what happened next. His granddaughter’s boyfriend was found dead in Whittaker’s home, reportedly from a drug overdose. As if one death wasn’t enough, several months later, Whittaker’s granddaughter was also found dead from a drug overdose. Five years later, Jack’s daughter and mother to his deceased granddaughter was found dead as well.
These five cases are not unique to lottery winners. In fact, there are multiple other stories similar to this one. Next time you think all your problems would be solved by winning the lottery, think again.
http://www.mybanktracker.com/news/2010/08/27/...
http://www.extratv.com/2012/03/30/the-extra-l...
http://www.smh.com.au/executive-style/luxury/...

[Big Johnson]

Get out and vote wrote:

<quoted text>
The Curse of The Lottery: 5 Winners and Their Demise
If you won the lottery, how would you spend your money? This is a common conversation starter among friends, family and first dates. What if winning the lottery meant years of disaster and heartbreak plaguing you and your family? Would you think a little harder about the question?
The “Curse of the Lottery” is a psychological study to some, a predictable outcome to others, and an unknown phenomenon to many. Here are five examples of winners that probably wish they hadn’t won in the first place:
1. Kenneth and Connie Parker
Happily married for 16 years, Kenneth and Connie Parker quickly watched their marriage disintegrate months after they won the $25 million jackpot. According to ABC News, Kenneth’s “wife turned cold, kicked him out of the condo they had bought, and told him she was keeping all the money.” It was an abrupt ending to what seemed to be a strong marriage.
2. Michael Carroll
After winning 9.7 million British Pounds (about $15 million), Michael Carroll thought he would be set for life. Reportedly “angry at his life of excess,” his wife, Sandra, left Michael about a year after he won the jackpot and took their baby daughter Brooke with her, according to Mail Online. Now, eight years later, Carroll has squandered all of his earnings on drugs, gambling and prostitutes. He is now just as poor, if not worse off, than he was when he started.
3. Billie Bob Harrell Jr.
After winning $31 million in the Texas lottery, Billie Bob, thought he had it all. Struggling to support his wife and teenage children on his Home Depot salary, the winnings seemed a blessing to Harrell. In 1997, he and his wife celebrated in their living room after finding out they had won the jackpot. Two years later, unable to take the pressure of constantly lending money to friends and lamenting the strained relationships in his family, Harrell shot and killed himself in a bedroom at his Kingwood, Texas, home.
4. Jeffrey Dampier
Hailing from Chicago, Ill., Jeffrey Dampier was the lucky winner of a $20 million prize from his home state’s lottery in 1996. He reportedly spent most of his earnings on those around him, even sending 38 members of his family on a seven-day Carribbean cruise. His sharing didn’t stop there: He also bought houses and cars for his parents and siblings, but not everyone showed their appreciation. In 2005, Victoria Jackson, Dampier’s sister-in-law, kidnapped and murdered him, leaving his body in his truck.
5. Jack Whittaker
At the time of his lottery victory, Jack Whittaker had the highest jackpot ever in the American lottery, with a single ticket at $315 million in the Powerball multi-state lottery. After he won, Whittaker donated a lot of money to churches and charities, but this did not stop the curse from following him. First,$545,000 in cash was stolen from his car while Whittaker was at a strip club. A second time $200,000 was stolen and later recovered. These problems were minor compared to what happened next. His granddaughter’s boyfriend was found dead in Whittaker’s home, reportedly from a drug overdose. As if one death wasn’t enough, several months later, Whittaker’s granddaughter was also found dead from a drug overdose. Five years later, Jack’s daughter and mother to his deceased granddaughter was found dead as well.
These five cases are not unique to lottery winners. In fact, there are multiple other stories similar to this one. Next time you think all your problems would be solved by winning the lottery, think again.
http://www.mybanktracker.com/news/2010/08/27/...

That's five out of what must be thousands. And only one of them went broke.

Anyway what's the point? People with money spend it. Isn't that why they bought the tickets in the first place? Isn't that the rationale for not taxing millionaires?

[TonyD2]

Female wrote:

Ruth is saying the wealthy are the smartest, have more morals and are just all around great wonderful people. The rest of us are stupid and immoral and bad people.

She didn't say any such thing. She's saying, and I agree, that the wealthy know how to create wealth.

[TonyD2]

Fred Gee Sanford wrote:

<quoted text>But you won't post this:
Top 10 Percent of Earners Paid 71 Percent of Federal Income Taxes

The top 10 percent of earners, and the top 10 percent of wealth holders are two different sets of people.

[TonyD2]

Female wrote:

2007 the richest 1% of the American population owned 34.6% of the country's total wealth, and the next 19% owned 50.5%. Thus, the top 20% of Americans owned 85% of the country's wealth and the bottom 80% of the population owned 15%. Financial inequality was greater than inequality in total wealth, with the top 1% of the population owning 42.7%, the next 19% of Americans owning 50.3%, and the bottom 80% owning 7%.[8] However, after the Great Recession which started in 2007, the share of total wealth owned by the top 1% of the population grew from 34.6% to 37.1%, and that owned by the top 20% of Americans grew from 85% to 87.7%. The Great Recession also caused a drop of 36.1% in median household wealth but a drop of only 11.1% for the top 1%, further widening the gap between the 1% and the 99%.[8][9][10]

All that means is that the recession hit the poor and middle class harder than the wealthy (all groups lost wealth). Further proof that those who know how to create wealth know what they're doing.

Ruth asked you what was an acceptable level for the wealth gap. If your going to claim something is too large, it stands to reason you'd have an opinion as to what size it should be, so why didn't you answer her question?

[TonyD2]

Big Johnson wrote:

<quoted text>
That's five out of what must be thousands. And only one of them went broke.
Anyway what's the point?

The point is that some people know what to do with money they get and others don't. And THAT'S the reason for the wealth gap!

[TonyD2]

Fred Gee Sanford wrote:

<quoted text>Governments don't create private sector jobs. They create conditions that make job creators feel secure enough to hire.

That's the hope anyway... it hasn't panned out of late. Government is failing us.

[Reality Speaks]

TonyD2 wrote:

<quoted text>
That's the hope anyway... it hasn't panned out of late. Government is failing us.

correct

the stock market crash late 2007 was from fear of what the future would hold under Obama. Spring 2009 it was half of what it was spring 2007.

There has been no budget for 4 years, run away spending, more regulations, and fear of what else is on the way.

Nobody even knows what the tax rate is in 120 days.

how can you plan anything with leadership like that?

how can you hire someone when you have no clue what they will cost you?

Romney will have in writing a ten year plan that you can invest in.

Obama will hope that something happens to spark hireing.

Obama wrote a book and made millions.

Romney ran a business that he earned enough money to have to pay millions in taxes every year.

Do you hire a proven experienced executive, or a peron how has show they are clueless, to run the largest economy in the world?

4 more years of the same is sure path to bankrupt this country; and the current adgenda is to double down on failure.

can you imagine if something happened to Obama and Biden became POTUS?

[FKA Reader]

Ruth wrote:

<quoted text>
Oh? Where did you hear that? If it's too large, what is the right amount of disparity? And what do you think should be done to reach that amount? Just take money from the wealthy and give it to them? Do you know what happens to most big lottery winners within just a few years? Do you know why?

The thing that makes a country politically stable is a solid middle class. I don't know the ideal percentage or the the ideal limits on the distance from top to bottom.

I do know that the gap has widened in recent years to an extent that has alarmed economists. And the percentage of the population that is middle class has shrunk.

The way that taxes play a role in reversing this is not by taking money from one and handing it to another, it is by setting progressive tax rates that are used to support an equalizing of opportunity--education, sanitation, public health, libraries, parks and recreation. In some cases mortgage support.

All of this has been reversing in recent years.

[VA Doc]

FKA Reader wrote:

<quoted text>
The thing that makes a country politically stable is a solid middle class. I don't know the ideal percentage or the the ideal limits on the distance from top to bottom.
I do know that the gap has widened in recent years to an extent that has alarmed economists. And the percentage of the population that is middle class has shrunk.
The way that taxes play a role in reversing this is not by taking money from one and handing it to another, it is by setting progressive tax rates that are used to support an equalizing of opportunity--education, sanitation, public health, libraries, parks and recreation. In some cases mortgage support.
All of this has been reversing in recent years.

So you are finally seeing the light that we can't keep taking the taxes from the middle class who work and giving it to the lowest income folks who don't work and gather freebies?

[TonyD2]

FKA Reader wrote:

<quoted text>
The thing that makes a country politically stable is a solid middle class. I don't know the ideal percentage or the the ideal limits on the distance from top to bottom.
I do know that the gap has widened in recent years to an extent that has alarmed economists.

Without an idea of what the right amount is, "too large" is meaningless.

And the percentage of the population that is middle class has shrunk.

Are you talking about wealth or income?

The way that taxes play a role in reversing this is not by taking money from one and handing it to another, it is by setting progressive tax rates that are used to support an equalizing of opportunity--education, sanitation, public health, libraries, parks and recreation. In some cases mortgage support. All of this has been reversing in recent years.

It's been happening longer than that. And not just in this country. The problem with taking money from one to give to another is that the other, more times than not, will waste it away frivolously rather than build wealth with it. And somehow the left thinks that's the wealthy's fault, and that the answer is to take and give even more. I don't think we should be subsidizing stupidity, throwing good money after bad.

And even if I did support subsidizing stupidity, I DAMNED sure don't think we have the right to steal from our children and grandchildren in order to do it! Those currently alive have the duty to pay off the debt, and keep it paid off! The fairest way to do that is in proportion to your wealth (as opposed to income).

[TonyD2]

VA Doc wrote:

<quoted text>
So you are finally seeing the light that we can't keep taking the taxes from the middle class who work and giving it to the lowest income folks who don't work and gather freebies?

That's right... they don't realize that the taxes the wealthy pay get added in to whatever they produce, and that it is those who are buying who are actually paying them. And there's NOTHING they can do about that, except waste even more resources in the futile attempt.

[Imagine-2011]

Fred Gee Sanford wrote:

<quoted text>Why during Clinton's terms? Two reasons:
1) The effects of the Reagan tax cuts were exercised by investors.
2) The first GOP controlled House in 40 years along with GOP control of the Senate.
Remember who gave Clinton his balanced budget...the Republican Congress with John Kasich leading the way on the economy.

Here is an interesting chart I found that shows who controlled which houses of congress & presidency since 1789-present.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Party_divisions_...