Tea Party Solution

Oroville, CA

#169 Apr 30, 2013
Sam Lowree wrote:
<quoted text>
This may not be common case but many people living on the system do very well for themselves. I see it everyday. They get subsidized housing,$300 rent for a 3 bedroom house, food stamps of $600/month for a family of 5 plus welfare benefits, free medical for the kids, etc.
I'm certainly supportive of cleaning up all of our government welfare programs. Of course there are people who take advantage of the system, and the waste and fraud span many administrations. Of course government help for the poor and working poor should go to those who really need that help, and not to actual free-loaders.

But why can't you look at corporate hand-outs in the same way? Corporate welfare totals twice the amount we pay to poor people.
Sam Lowree wrote:
<There are many reasons a company may not pay taxes, losses carried over, losses for the current year, profit versus loss, etc.
If you read what I've posted, you'll see that the huge tax breaks we give to the big multi-nationals center around the fact that our preferential tax laws let them play accounting games with their profits. Their profits are not taxed if they can hide them overseas, and the multi-nationals have manipulated these loopholes to the max.

Smaller US corporations, ones that are not multi-national, do not have access to these loopholes. Ordinary citizens do not have access to these loopholes. I thought you were all for equality and a level playing field?
Sam Lowree wrote:
<Your leftie link doesn't provide the full picture, as usual. Do you really think the IRS would let these companies paying zero taxes slide if they were doing something illegal? Not in this Obama era.
What they're doing is not illegal-- but should be.
Sam Lowree wrote:
<Capital gains are taxed at a lower rate because the original investment has already been taxed. Why do you complain? You love the government and want them to regulate everything, the government set up this system of taxation.
Oh, is that why capital gains taxes are so low? ALL earnings, for all of us, are already taxed. And every time we spend our earnings, we're taxed again. Yours is a meaningless argument.

And again you put words in my mouth-- I DON'T love the government. I DO love our country, and want to see our government improve.

And I DON'T want the government to "regulate everything". When have I ever said that? Apparently, from what you've posted, you see only two choices-- regulate everything, or regulate nothing.
Mike the Pike

Glenn, CA

#170 May 1, 2013
GRANDPA NICOLAI wrote:
<quoted text>
>
>
The hell you ranting about...???
First off, politicians from both parties have been attempting health care reform for decades...
Second, the downward slide of the economy and the US middle class coincides with the so called "Reagan Revolution" and Bush.W merely finished the job Reagan started...
Finally, the Democrats do not need illegals in order to win elections because there are plenty of America hating T Publicans running around practically handing the elections to the Democrats.
The Reagan years gave us some of the most powerful economic growth in the history of the country. The US was as close to full employment as it ever has been due to low taxes and minimal regulation of business. Small businesses grew at a phenomenal rate and provided a strong wealth building base to our (at that time) growing middle class. The only segment of society that did not participate in this economic upswing was the traditional inner city welfare recipients who lacked education and motivation. The economic boom set in motion by Reagan lasted through Bush 1 and through Clinton's administration.

The great collapse that happened at the end of Bush 2's term was really the result of the Democratic congress interfering with banking policies in order to create fairness. The only problem is that fairness did not allow the bank to discriminate on the basis of whether someone could pay their loan back or not. Wall street and the big banks found a way around this by packaging groups of loans and selling the package to bondholders based on an average credit / risk rating. The big banks got wealthy doing this but got drunk on high risk credit extensions by their own greed causing the wall street part of the problem. The root however, was democratically controlled congress interfering with the private credit markets in a social experiment mandating "fairness".

Enough of economic history, how can you not see the situation on the border as a huge problem which threatens our safety and economic security as a country going forward? Asking this question does not make me a racist or xenophobe as our liberal friends always resort to doing in order to shut down an inconvenient question that their world view cannot provide an answer for. But really, how do you see anything positive in our current management of the border today? And, what are the reasons for this management? I would really like to know.
GRANDPA NICOLAI

Chico, CA

#171 May 1, 2013
Mike the Pike wrote:
<quoted text>
The Reagan years gave us some of the most powerful economic growth in the history of the country. The US was as close to full employment as it ever has been due to low taxes and minimal regulation of business. Small businesses grew at a phenomenal rate and provided a strong wealth building base to our (at that time) growing middle class. The only segment of society that did not participate in this economic upswing was the traditional inner city welfare recipients who lacked education and motivation. The economic boom set in motion by Reagan lasted through Bush 1 and through Clinton's administration.
The great collapse that happened at the end of Bush 2's term was really the result of the Democratic congress interfering with banking policies in order to create fairness. The only problem is that fairness did not allow the bank to discriminate on the basis of whether someone could pay their loan back or not. Wall street and the big banks found a way around this by packaging groups of loans and selling the package to bondholders based on an average credit / risk rating. The big banks got wealthy doing this but got drunk on high risk credit extensions by their own greed causing the wall street part of the problem. The root however, was democratically controlled congress interfering with the private credit markets in a social experiment mandating "fairness".
Enough of economic history, how can you not see the situation on the border as a huge problem which threatens our safety and economic security as a country going forward? Asking this question does not make me a racist or xenophobe as our liberal friends always resort to doing in order to shut down an inconvenient question that their world view cannot provide an answer for. But really, how do you see anything positive in our current management of the border today? And, what are the reasons for this management? I would really like to know.
>
>
Once again you are extremely good at preaching the party Gospel, but facts tell a different story, here are a few appetizers to possibly pique your intellectual appetite....

I don't have the time to properly educate you and those of your persuasion, but a little research on your part will show that Reagan lowered the taxes on his wealthy friends from 70+% to 28% and due to to the ensuing shortfall of revenue he later was forced to raise taxes 11 times, mostly on the middle class.

Since the tax cut on the wealthy resulted in less revenue to the government Reagan tripled the national debt from $900 billion to $3 trillion.

Reagan's tax cuts to the wealthy are the gift that gives on giving to this very day, you could say that we owe Reagan a debt we will never be able to repay....!!!

Then, what about the Iran Contra fiasco...?

BTW, did you know that Reagan financed Osama Bin Ladin and the Mujahadin during the 80's promising them that the US will rebuild Afghanistan if they help us evict the Soviets from Afghanistan... A promise on which the U.S later reneged on...???

Reagan also ignored the AIDS epidemic and waged war on the middle class by weakening the labor unions.

You are also feigning concern about "the situate south of the border" but did you know that your patron saint gave amnesty to 3 million undocumented workers back in 1982, providing American corporations with a cheap source of labor at the expense of American workers...???

It is laughable that you blame the Bush era economic collapse on the Democrats when it was Bush who started two needles multi- trillion dollar wars and a drug plan while simultaneously lowering taxes on his wealthy buddies.
Crickets

Williams, CA

#172 May 1, 2013
History tells a different story.

Personal disposable income has grown nearly 6 times more under Democratic presidents
Gross Domestic Product (GDP) has grown 7 times more under Democratic presidents
Corporate profits have grown over 16% more per year under Democratic presidents (they actually declined under Republicans by an average of 4.53%/year)
Average annual compound return on the stock market has been 18 times greater under Democratic presidents (If you invested $100k for 40 years of Republican administrations you had $126k at the end, if you invested $100k for 40 years of Democrat administrations you had $3.9M at the end)
Republican presidents added 2.5 times more to the national debt than Democratic presidents
The two times the economy steered into the ditch (Great Depression and Great Recession) were during Republican, laissez faire administrations
http://www.forbes.com/sites/adamhartung/2012/...
Crickets

Williams, CA

#173 May 1, 2013
Sorry grandpa, my post above was supposed to be a response to Mike's post not yours.
Mike the Pike

Glenn, CA

#174 May 1, 2013
Grandpa

We can disagree on our interpretation of historical events any time but right now I am much more interested in your explanation for our current situation on the border. I really am interested in your opinion on this topic.

thanks,
Crickets

Williams, CA

#175 May 1, 2013
I know you were not asking me, but the fact is that border security has increased under Obama, more border patrol agents, more spent on border enforcement, more deportations, less illegal entry.

That is simply a fact.

http://americasvoiceonline.org/research/chart...

Want tighter border security? You're already getting it.
www.washingtonpost.com/.../the-2007-immigrati...

I can go on.
Mike the Pike

Glenn, CA

#176 May 1, 2013
I will check it out.
Thanks,
GRANDPA NICOLAI

Chico, CA

#177 May 1, 2013
Mike the Pike wrote:
Grandpa
We can disagree on our interpretation of historical events any time but right now I am much more interested in your explanation for our current situation on the border. I really am interested in your opinion on this topic.
thanks,
>
>
Nothing happens in a vacuum, we can not separate what goes on in our economy and "on the border today " from "historical events"

It all goes back to cause and effect or causality, a concept that righties do not seem to be familiar with at this juncture....
Mike the Pike

Glenn, CA

#178 May 1, 2013
GRANDPA NICOLAI wrote:
<quoted text>
>
>
Nothing happens in a vacuum, we can not separate what goes on in our economy and "on the border today " from "historical events"
It all goes back to cause and effect or causality, a concept that righties do not seem to be familiar with at this juncture....
Not an answer. Quite frankly, I expected more from you than this. Your comment is very empty because the situation on the border is of a very specific nature with a whole spectrum of possible ramifications. If you cannot pull yourself out of your hatred generated by things from the past in order to thoughtfully analyze and discuss one of the most pressing socio-political situations of today then I must question the integrity of your thought process.

This was not a trick question. I was sincerely interested in the logic of your side but now I can see that the discussion will never yield anything greater then the same old blame and insult hurling that has happened all along. Good day.
sociopathic Liberals

Chico, CA

#179 May 1, 2013
Mike the Pike wrote:
<quoted text>
Not an answer. Quite frankly, I expected more from you than this. Your comment is very empty
You don't know nicoliar, do you??? Expect no more or less from this dope, it only throws out its childish rants, attacks and ever so stupid opinions, and never supports its crap with anything!!!
"Butt" a diaper! LOL...
GRANDPA NICOLAI

Chico, CA

#180 May 1, 2013
Mike the Pike wrote:
<quoted text>
Not an answer. Quite frankly, I expected more from you than this. Your comment is very empty because the situation on the border is of a very specific nature with a whole spectrum of possible ramifications. If you cannot pull yourself out of your hatred generated by things from the past in order to thoughtfully analyze and discuss one of the most pressing socio-political situations of today then I must question the integrity of your thought process.
This was not a trick question. I was sincerely interested in the logic of your side but now I can see that the discussion will never yield anything greater then the same old blame and insult hurling that has happened all along. Good day.
>
>
It is every bit an answer and not too much different than your refusal to discuss the effects of Reagan's and Bush's legacy, which are still very much with us and bitting us in the butt as we speak.

The "socio-political situation" as you call "the situation on the border" is not much different than it was in the 80's and just about at any other time, and it is basically been driven by the same perennial forces..( just visit any orchard or construction site)

As always, the future is pretty much determined by the past and I am sorry that your side so hates the consequences brought on by your political idols that it causes all of you conservatives to slip into cognitive dissonance and refuse to acknowledge or even discuss the possibility they might have made a mistake....

Have a good evening.
GRANDPA NICOLAI

Chico, CA

#181 May 1, 2013
sociopathic Liberals wrote:
<quoted text>
You don't know nicoliar, do you??? Expect no more or less from this dope, it only throws out its childish rants, attacks and ever so stupid opinions, and never supports its crap with anything!!!
"Butt" a diaper! LOL...
>
>
CRICKETS and SOLUTION are still waiting for you to "support" your mindless rants about MSNBC and the only thing they got so far from you is a truck load of horse crap.
The Infantile left Winged

Redding, CA

#182 May 1, 2013
GRANDPA NICOLAI wrote:
<quoted text>
>
>
CRICKETS and SOLUTION are still waiting for you to "support" your mindless rants about MSNBC and the only thing they got so far from you is a truck load of horse crap.
Already done, with FIVE links, you blind truth and common sense free moron!
GRANDPA NICOLAI

Chico, CA

#183 May 1, 2013
The Infantile left Winged wrote:
<quoted text>
Already done, with FIVE links, you blind truth and common sense free moron!
>
>
5 links to what...?????

Rush Limbaugh and assorted opinion mills don't count, you need to come up with some facts, dope!
The Infantile left Winged

Redding, CA

#184 May 1, 2013
GRANDPA NICOLAI wrote:
<quoted text>
>
>
5 links to what...?????
Rush Limbaugh and assorted opinion mills don't count, you need to come up with some facts, dope!
And your sources to prove them wrong are where???
Your opinion nicoliar? It is just as worthless as a liberal on welfare and food stamps!

“Government IS the problem.”

Since: Jan 08

Chico, CA

#185 May 1, 2013
Tea Party Solution wrote:
<quoted text>
But why can't you look at corporate hand-outs in the same way? Corporate welfare totals twice the amount we pay to poor people.
I have stated many times before that the tax payers should not be subsidizing any business, not green energy, not farmers, not ethanol energy. Nothing.
Tea Party Solution wrote:
<quoted text>
If you read what I've posted, you'll see that the huge tax breaks we give to the big multi-nationals center around the fact that our preferential tax laws let them play accounting games with their profits. Their profits are not taxed if they can hide them overseas, and the multi-nationals have manipulated these loopholes to the max.
You Lefties are always demonizing corporations and oversimplifying the tax situation. How exactly are corporations hiding money over seas? If corporations are doing international business then they must follow the tax laws of the countries that they are doing business in. Correct?
Tea Party Solution wrote:
<quoted text>
Smaller US corporations, ones that are not multi-national, do not have access to these loopholes. Ordinary citizens do not have access to these loopholes. I thought you were all for equality and a level playing field?
Of course businesses don’t have access to child tax credit or food stamps, etc. I am for equality. Tax everyone at 15% with the first $25k tax free. Tax all businesses at 15%.
Tea Party Solution wrote:
<quoted text>
What they're doing is not illegal-- but should be.
Why should it be illegal? Because you say so? Obviously the law makers feel otherwise.
Tea Party Solution wrote:
<quoted text>
And again you put words in my mouth-- I DON'T love the government. I DO love our country, and want to see our government improve.
And I DON'T want the government to "regulate everything". When have I ever said that? Apparently, from what you've posted, you see only two choices-- regulate everything, or regulate nothing.
Of course you want more regulations, you state it all the time.

“ Socialism, like the ancient ideas from which it springs, confuses the distinction between government and society. As a result of this, every time we object to a thing being done by government, the socialists conclude that we object to its being done at all.
We disapprove of state education. Then the socialists say that we are opposed to any education. We object to a state religion. Then the socialists say that we want no religion at all. We object to a state-enforced equality. Then they say that we are against equality. And so on, and so on. It is as if the socialists were to accuse us of not wanting persons to eat because we do not want the state to raise grain.”
Bastiat.

I see another one of your elite Dems is having a battle with the IRS. Another wealthy hypocritical Dem. They want to raise taxes on all but refuse to pay their own tax liability.
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-05-01/bill...
The Infantile left Winged

Redding, CA

#186 May 1, 2013
GRANDPA NICOLAI wrote:
<quoted text>
>
>
5 links to what...?????
Rush Limbaugh and assorted opinion mills don't count, you need to come up with some facts, dope!
So now all of the sudden your left wing sources ARE opinion mills???

Thank you stupid as a stick... you just proved my point for me!!!
ROTFLMAPO at all of you liberal idiots!!!

Pew Research Center Study Claims MSNBC is 85 Percent 'Opinion-Driven' While Fox News Only 45 Percent
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/03/21/1195 ...#

CNN Panel Takes On Study Finding MSNBC ‘Mostly Opinion,’ Mocks ‘Soft-Spoken’ Chris Matthews.
http://www.mediaite.com/tv/cnn-panel-takes-on ...

Yes, you ignorant buffoon, those links I provided ARE:
1) Daily Kooks

2)CNN

3) Mediaite.

I love it, the way that it is soooo simple to make complete idiots out of you liberal bone heads!!!
Maybe you dumbphuqs should pay just a little attention to what others are posting on here!!!
Man... you liberals are the epitome of pure ignorance, stupidity and moronic!!! ROTFLMAO AT ALL OF YOU IDIOTS!!!
This is too much fun... thank you!
Krankenstein

Chico, CA

#188 May 1, 2013
According to a latest Poll taken by Kaiser Health, only 35% of the public believe that Obama Care is good for the country.

People are waking up to the new taxes, higher built in costs and are also becoming fearful of the collapse of the quality of care.

Obummer is losing support on all fronts very fast! A little late in my opinion but welcome none the less!!!
Krankenstein

Chico, CA

#189 May 1, 2013
The Infantile left Winged wrote:
<quoted text>
So now all of the sudden your left wing sources ARE opinion mills???
Thank you stupid as a stick... you just proved my point for me!!!
ROTFLMAPO at all of you liberal idiots!!!
Pew Research Center Study Claims MSNBC is 85 Percent 'Opinion-Driven' While Fox News Only 45 Percent
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/03/21/1195 ...#
CNN Panel Takes On Study Finding MSNBC ‘Mostly Opinion,’ Mocks ‘Soft-Spoken’ Chris Matthews.
http://www.mediaite.com/tv/cnn-panel-takes-on ...
Yes, you ignorant buffoon, those links I provided ARE:
1) Daily Kooks
2)CNN
3) Mediaite.
I love it, the way that it is soooo simple to make complete idiots out of you liberal bone heads!!!
Maybe you dumbphuqs should pay just a little attention to what others are posting on here!!!
Man... you liberals are the epitome of pure ignorance, stupidity and moronic!!! ROTFLMAO AT ALL OF YOU IDIOTS!!!
This is too much fun... thank you!
I don't think gramps is capable of an independent thought! Been drinking the toxic demorat cocktail too long.

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.

Magalia Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Replenish the aquifer (Jan '14) 19 min Rain Cloud 45
Ruptured pipeline spills 21,000 gallons of oil ... 2 hr GRANDPA NICOLAI 14
Global Warm-thers: Trapped by irony 2 hr Democrats Are Dan... 85
Democrats' Vanishing Future 4 hr Democrats Are Dan... 1
Police: Gray should've received medical care be... 15 hr Democrats Are Dan... 122
News SmartMeters being installed by PG&E in Butte Co... (May '10) 23 hr Sigmund Freud 36
Willits bipass collapse: enviro-sabotage? 23 hr Middle of the road 229
More from around the web

Magalia People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]