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)

Redd

United States

#19215 Dec 11, 2012
Old Army wrote:
<quoted text>
Methinks the lady doth protest too much.
Maybe so, but y'all are getting your butts handed to you.

I love it.
dont know nothin

Benton City, WA

#19216 Dec 11, 2012
BarneyIII wrote:
<quoted text>
You haven't posted anything worth responding to you. Asking you a serious question about politics or economics would be like asking my housekeeper about gastrointestinal surgery, she would have an idea, but not a clue (she would be less gassy than you) but she would be honest enough to admit her limitations. As you will eventually will learn in life is that a person that only posts one side of an issue isn't interested in facts, he is just making talking points. Look to Old Army and Redd, you know which side they are on but they are not blinded bt any particular ideology.
i would have to disagree with you .. i have posted alot of questions and reports that have not yet been responded too when they were presented... i have disproved every thought any repblican has posted on here with no credible responses from any of them, including you... so it is ok for you to post your opinion on here but then when disproven with facts it's not ok to respond?... that makes no sense.... noone has presented or asked a serious political question in the republican party on here yet i have responded to every one with lack of effort in return...which means when i prove you wrong with the truth there's nothing left to say except the demonizing and name bashing you guys seem to only do on here... and i have said and will continue to say i will give credit where credit is due.. just like when the republicans actually proposed a counter offer to the presidents plan ... even though it's the same plan that romney initially ran on and will not hold up .. i still congratulated them ...and only people on here that keep posting one side are republicans saying the same thing then saying i'm wrong and not backing their ways of thinking up with credible sources.. i don't care whether it's republican or democrat or independant .. not one credible source.... because everyone back there that posts on here either gets their info from family members or fox or coworkers... and you guys keep saying talking points like you know what the hell your talking about .. you guys are providing the talking points by posting lies.. i inturn prove them wrong with facts and every single republican on here keeps saying i'm providing the talking points.. i don't get it!! look the stuff up .. if your too ignorant to use google and search for the facts yourself then maybe you should rethink your way of thinking... and i am not a conformist and do not care what redd nor old army thinks or does... i only know what i think and my thought process is one of common sense... i take the facts that are presented and historical evidence and come to an informed conclussion.. it's not hard .. the only problem with republicans is when presented with the truth and facts to support the truth .. they still turn a blind eye and believe only their way of thinking.. you cannot put blame on the other person when it is in fact your party and you as an individual who is wrong and have been proven wrong time and time again.. leaders within your own party are even seeing this and are voicing their opinions.. even newt gingrich and limbaugh are realizing this ... so go ahead and listen to what your peers and fox news tell you becuase as long as you keep living in a fantasy land the only people you are hurting are yourselves.
dont know nothin

Benton City, WA

#19217 Dec 11, 2012
Reality Check wrote:
Looks like the taxes are set to go up for those making less than $250k per year. The first of many hidden fees/taxes came out about Obamacare. A $63 pre-existing condition fee for everyone having a pre-existing condition. Will those making less than $250k not have to pay this? I think not. Oh well, I guess poliicians are supposed to break promises. Obama sure has.
lol your a joke .. there is no precondition fee where did you hear this nonsense your family and friends? lol is that not discrimination by singleing out pre exising conditions? but then you may say well what about the rich having to pay the tax is that not discrimination?.. no there is no such thing as discrimination against greed...and no like i have said time and time again taxes below 250,000 dollars a year will stay the same for another year at least... so your ignorant way of thinking has not place in a sensible discussion.
dont know nothin

Benton City, WA

#19218 Dec 11, 2012
Linda wrote:
This is from a friend of mine in N.C. and he's pretty much up on all financies. I started cashing in all my bonds today and going to empty out all my bank deposits before Jan. 1, 2013. What little you get in interest, you will turn around and pay it back in taxes.
His plan is to sneak it in after the November election to keep it under the radar. This is a 1% tax on all transaction at any financial institution i. e. Banks, Credit Unions, extra. Any deposit you make, or move around within your account, i. e. transfer to, will have a 1% tax charged. If your pay check or your social Security or whatever is direct deposit, 1% tax charged. If you hand carry a check in to deposit, 1% tax charged, If you take cash in to deposit, 1% tax charged. This is from the man who promised that if you make under $250,000 per year, you will not see one penny of new tax.
Keep your eyes and ears open, you will be amazed at what you learn.
lol if your talking about the financial tranistion tax then my friend you are poorly misguided and ill informed... "The US imposed a financial transaction tax from 1914 to 1966. The federal tax on stock sales of 0.1 per cent at issuance and 0.04 per cent on transfers. Currently, the US has a very minor 0.0034 per cent tax which is levied on stock transactions. The tax, known as Section 31 fee, is used to support the operation costs of the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). In 1998, the federal government collected $1.8 billion in revenue from these fees, almost five times the annual operating costs of the SEC.[42 that is the only relivance your post that your talking about and there will be NO 1% charge on anyone making transactions in the way you proposed .. so quit beleiving every so called friend you have and look the facts up for yourself before you start taking someones word as truth.
dont know nothin

Benton City, WA

#19219 Dec 11, 2012
Questioner wrote:
<quoted text>
This was a proposal that was made back in 2004 and would have replaced the income tax, it has never gotten anywhere. I like conspiracy theories as much as anyone, especially the anti-Obama ones, but this one lacks credence.
and this is true !! way to be informed!! i'm glad everyone does not buy into all the lies and conspiracies being thrown around by republicans!! you.. barney ... redd .. cudos to all you guys!!
Questioner

Jonesboro, AR

#19220 Dec 11, 2012
dont know nothin wrote:
<quoted text>and this is true !! way to be informed!! i'm glad everyone does not buy into all the lies and conspiracies being thrown around by republicans!! you.. barney ... redd .. cudos to all you guys!!
You are just as anxious as she was to jump onto any article that would justify your cause. Try just once to post both sides of an issue, you might find an actual solution is possible. You cannot penalize the productive to solve all the nation's problems, eventually you and Barney would have to get a job to support the country and we know that isn't going to happen.

Since: Jan 11

Location hidden

#19221 Dec 11, 2012
No. I did not vote today.
guest

United States

#19222 Dec 11, 2012
BARNEYII wrote:
<quoted text>
I think they comprehend just fine,
it is their denial of the facts, and lack of knowledge to defend their position,
that produce the constant deluge of ad hominem attacks.
You once again described yourself perfectly. Congratulations...
dont know nothin

Benton City, WA

#19223 Dec 11, 2012
Questioner wrote:
<quoted text>
You are just as anxious as she was to jump onto any article that would justify your cause. Try just once to post both sides of an issue, you might find an actual solution is possible. You cannot penalize the productive to solve all the nation's problems, eventually you and Barney would have to get a job to support the country and we know that isn't going to happen.
lol no genius "she" i guess if you know them .. posted a blantent lie .. i .. just proved her wrong by providing the truth.. there is a difference .. when something is the truth there is no other side to it.. it can be only one thing.. the truth ..lol what do you guys not get about that .. you may like the truth or dislike the truth but you cannnnnnottt change the truth..

Since: Dec 10

Kansas City Ks.

#19224 Dec 11, 2012
guest wrote:
I cannot wait for us to plunge off the fiscal cliff. I have a modest amount saved and am self employed. The damage to the economy will belong to the socialist in charge. The people dependent on the goverment will suffer. Obama is trying to run this Nation based on the model California has put in place. Now mind you California is broke, busted, over and done. Gov. Moonbeam himself has said they are buying time and waiting on a miracle (governemnt bailout). Taxing the wealthy and big bussiness has never ever worked. They just lay off people. So buckle up folks, we are heading off the cliff. We will have a depression that will last a few yars then we can re-build from that. A slim majority voted in November(52 to 48% is far from a mandate) to embrace the cliff. You ask for it Amerca, you got it. Hold on!
"Taxing the wealthy and big bussiness has never ever worked. They just lay off people"

I bet Ronald Regan would disagree with that statement.

In August 1982, the unemployment rate hit 10.1 percent, while mortgage rates hovered near their all-time high at 15 percent. Reagan's tax cuts had had a year to stimulate the economy, but they had not done so.

So Republicans in Congress and some members of his own administration convinced Reagan to agree to a $98.3 billion tax increase, the largest peacetime increase in history.

n Aug. 17, 1982, while a House-Senate conference committee was working out final details with White House support, and it became clear that the tax bill would become law, the Dow Jones industrial average responded with its single biggest one-day leap ever—a 4.9 percent gain, the equivalent of a 600 point gain today.(The actual gain was 38.81 points, pushing the Dow Jones above the 800 mark to 831.24. And it marked the beginning of the bull market.

Reagan signed the tax increase on Sept. 3, 1982. A few months later the economy roared to life as well.

Since: Dec 10

Kansas City Ks.

#19225 Dec 11, 2012
Dow Jones Industrial Average
Dow Jones Indices:.DJI - Dec 11 4:03pm ET
13248.44+78.56 (0.60%)


Would you look at that boys, rumor has it the Republicans are caving on a tax increase and look at what the DOW, did today.........

UP----------78.56%


Reality Check

United States

#19226 Dec 11, 2012
dont know nothin wrote:
<quoted text>lol your a joke .. there is no precondition fee where did you hear this nonsense your family and friends? lol is that not discrimination by singleing out pre exising conditions? but then you may say well what about the rich having to pay the tax is that not discrimination?.. no there is no such thing as discrimination against greed...and no like i have said time and time again taxes below 250,000 dollars a year will stay the same for another year at least... so your ignorant way of thinking has not place in a sensible discussion.
The $63 pre existing condition fee is a fee that is dedicated to offset the cost of Obamacare beginning in 2014. It is to be paid for by companies that have to give their employees healthcare. The companies will then in turn pass the fee on to their employees. Unless all of the employees of all companies that have to give healthcare benefits make over $250k each, then they will have to pay more from their checks. You will call it a fee and not a tax but if something such as this is forced on you then it's a tax.
Definition of discrimination: Treatment or consideration based on class or category rather than individual merit; partiality or prejudice.
So those that are not rich can, in no way, feel this way towards those that are? That's not the way the definition reads. Guess it doesn't fit your liberal point of view because then the wealthy would have to get equal consideration when any law was being crafted or voted on. You have been pretty adamant about the fact that if you make less than $250k per year your taxes will remain exactly the same. Now it's at least for the next year. Should give everyone confidence not knowing that their tax rates will be stable for more than a year.
Redd

United States

#19227 Dec 11, 2012
dont know nothin wrote:
<quoted text>

When something is the truth there is no other side to it.. it can be only one thing.. the truth ..lol what do you guys not get about that .. you may like the truth or dislike the truth but you cannnnnnottt change the truth..
Excuse me..Fox News can and does.

Since: Dec 10

Kansas City Ks.

#19228 Dec 11, 2012
Reality Check wrote:
<quoted text>
The $63 pre existing condition fee is a fee that is dedicated to offset the cost of Obamacare beginning in 2014. It is to be paid for by companies that have to give their employees healthcare. The companies will then in turn pass the fee on to their employees. Unless all of the employees of all companies that have to give healthcare benefits make over $250k each, then they will have to pay more from their checks. You will call it a fee and not a tax but if something such as this is forced on you then it's a tax.
Definition of discrimination: Treatment or consideration based on class or category rather than individual merit; partiality or prejudice.
So those that are not rich can, in no way, feel this way towards those that are? That's not the way the definition reads. Guess it doesn't fit your liberal point of view because then the wealthy would have to get equal consideration when any law was being crafted or voted on. You have been pretty adamant about the fact that if you make less than $250k per year your taxes will remain exactly the same. Now it's at least for the next year. Should give everyone confidence not knowing that their tax rates will be stable for more than a year.
.

It is a temporary assessment levied for three years starting in 2014, designed to raise $25 billion. It starts at $63 ($5.25 per month) and then declines.

It will phase out completely in 2017 – unless Congress, with lawmakers searching everywhere for revenue to reduce federal deficits – decides to extend it.

Since: Dec 10

Kansas City Ks.

#19229 Dec 11, 2012
Reality Check wrote:
<quoted text>
The $63 pre existing condition fee is a fee that is dedicated to offset the cost of Obamacare beginning in 2014. It is to be paid for by companies that have to give their employees healthcare. The companies will then in turn pass the fee on to their employees. Unless all of the employees of all companies that have to give healthcare benefits make over $250k each, then they will have to pay more from their checks. You will call it a fee and not a tax but if something such as this is forced on you then it's a tax.
Definition of discrimination: Treatment or consideration based on class or category rather than individual merit; partiality or prejudice.
So those that are not rich can, in no way, feel this way towards those that are? That's not the way the definition reads. Guess it doesn't fit your liberal point of view because then the wealthy would have to get equal consideration when any law was being crafted or voted on. You have been pretty adamant about the fact that if you make less than $250k per year your taxes will remain exactly the same. Now it's at least for the next year. Should give everyone confidence not knowing that their tax rates will be stable for more than a year.
I would guess this doesn't fit your conserative point of view;

This program will reduce unreimbursed usage of hospital (ER) and other medical facilities by the uninsured and thereby lower medical expenses and premiums for all.

Since: Dec 10

Kansas City Ks.

#19230 Dec 11, 2012
Or your conservative one either, take your pick.
Reality Check

United States

#19231 Dec 11, 2012
BARNEYII wrote:
<quoted text>.
It is a temporary assessment levied for three years starting in 2014, designed to raise $25 billion. It starts at $63 ($5.25 per month) and then declines.
It will phase out completely in 2017 – unless Congress, with lawmakers searching everywhere for revenue to reduce federal deficits – decides to extend it.
When it starts and when it ends isn't the point. Obama said he would not rais taxes on ANYONE making less than $250K per year. You can call it a fee or whatever you want but it is the exact same thing as a tax. Can you tell me that you believe no one who makes under $250K is going to have to pay this? This is just the beginning of the new fees, or revenues, or taxes. The bill is too large and too expensive to have only the wealthy pay for it. Companies are supposed to absorb certain fees and costs but you and I know that isn't going to happen.
Reality Check

United States

#19232 Dec 11, 2012
BARNEYII wrote:
<quoted text>
I would guess this doesn't fit your conserative point of view;
This program will reduce unreimbursed usage of hospital (ER) and other medical facilities by the uninsured and thereby lower medical expenses and premiums for all.
It sounds good and all but why would those who used to go to the emergency room for everything including the common cold stop simply because we have Obamacare? From what I have seen in the attitudes of the tenants in my rental property, there will be more abuse and not less.
Reality Check

United States

#19233 Dec 11, 2012
BARNEYII wrote:
Or your conservative one either, take your pick.
I have to admit Barney, after going round and round with "don't know nothin", I have a greater appreciation in debating you. Now don't get the big head.
dont know nothin

Benton City, WA

#19234 Dec 11, 2012
Reality Check wrote:
<quoted text>
The $63 pre existing condition fee is a fee that is dedicated to offset the cost of Obamacare beginning in 2014. It is to be paid for by companies that have to give their employees healthcare. The companies will then in turn pass the fee on to their employees. Unless all of the employees of all companies that have to give healthcare benefits make over $250k each, then they will have to pay more from their checks. You will call it a fee and not a tax but if something such as this is forced on you then it's a tax.
Definition of discrimination: Treatment or consideration based on class or category rather than individual merit; partiality or prejudice.
So those that are not rich can, in no way, feel this way towards those that are? That's not the way the definition reads. Guess it doesn't fit your liberal point of view because then the wealthy would have to get equal consideration when any law was being crafted or voted on. You have been pretty adamant about the fact that if you make less than $250k per year your taxes will remain exactly the same. Now it's at least for the next year. Should give everyone confidence not knowing that their tax rates will be stable for more than a year.
um prove it in factual evidence what you are saying .. it's easy to say somethig.. it'sanother to back it up... nothing you say or have pposted on here has had any factual credability... i have posted links or quotes from my position..there is nothing in the bill that says pre existing conditions will have to pay extra to have health insurance ... NOWHERE.... Discrimination is the prejudicial or distinguishing treatment of an individual based on their actual or perceived membership in a certain group or category, such as their race, gender, sexual orientation, ethnicity, national origin, or religion... so yah i know wat discrimination is i do not need your definition... and if you work for a company and decide not to use their insurance because you can find it cheaper somewhere else then how are they gonna "tax" your check?..anyways ... what you have said is not going to happen so there is actually no argument to be made here... taking what fox and friends and your coworkers tell you is not a good way to recieve information on politics...yah at least or the next year i don't now how long their gonna come to an agreement on the taxes .. i hope it's the standard for at least the next 4 but i'm not the one involved in the negotiations... so i see you also .. even though this is not going to happen ... stated that the companies would pass the fees on.. well guess what blame the company you work for .. if thy can't take a hit after all the money they made before the crash and continued tomake after we bailed some of them out and are continuing to make due to the tax breaks.. they should feel ashamed of themselves for passing these so called taxs onto the employee instead of taking initiative to give alittle and reinvest... but it's not going to happen and as for me healthcare exchange starts in 13 not 14 so i gueesss i get an early start... lol get real and get facts or get out

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.

Pocahontas Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Mikey 9 hr what? 8
jennifer truitt (Dec '15) Thu Robert 14
Fantasha rutledge (Feb '13) Thu Amen 32
Gerry thielemier likes it in the anal cavity Thu Gerry 5
News Two arrested on meth charges in Lawrence County (May '10) Thu Yep 60
Stop lights in pocahontas Wed research 4
Lindsey harris Nov 30 babydaddy 4

Pocahontas Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Pocahontas Mortgages