Did you vote today?

Created by Rick on Jun 8, 2010

5,934 votes

Click on an option to vote

Yes

No

Other (explain below)

Since: Dec 10

Washington DC

#20083 Dec 31, 2012
Good example;

"Obama is going to sacrifice 98% of the nation for the sake of raising taxes on 2%"

Other side of that coin;

REPUBLICAN MAJORITY (house) is going to sacrifice 98% of the nation

for the sake of not LETTING TAX CUTS EXPIRE ON THE OTHER 2%".
Guess Who

Ash Flat, AR

#20084 Dec 31, 2012
Raptor in Michigan wrote:
<quoted text>
The 20 year old adult that committed every act, from going in her house.... to taking her guns.... to driving to the school.... and to finally pulling the trigger, takes sole responsibility for it. Come on Churm, only a lib would blame it someone who didn't do it.
Don't we all know individuals we think aren't mentally stable? We can't all have these people put away, can we?
The mother was the 20 year olds enabler. If the shooter had lived he likely would never went to trial, He would have likely been declared not competent to stand trial. I do think it was a premeditated crime. however even four year olds are capable of doing premeditated things.
guest

Blytheville, AR

#20085 Dec 31, 2012
BARNEYII wrote:
Good example;
"Obama is going to sacrifice 98% of the nation for the sake of raising taxes on 2%"
Other side of that coin;
REPUBLICAN MAJORITY (house) is going to sacrifice 98% of the nation
for the sake of not LETTING TAX CUTS EXPIRE ON THE OTHER 2%".
Considering the tax increase won't make a dent in the deficit, and Obama has admitted that increasing taxes on the wealthy is not about cutting the deficit but about "fairness," your "other side of that coin," is wrong no matter how many times you try to flip it. But then again... you've never been about putting the right thing on here, just your "side of that coin."

Since: Dec 10

Washington DC

#20086 Dec 31, 2012
Billy Bob wrote:
<quoted text>Yep that's the blind one eyed reaction i was expecting.
Thinking or acting for oneself in a manner in which which others disagree is not independent enough.

Anyone that is not inline with their independent view, well their just a Liberal.

Think Rush, or Hannity or Michael Savage, or any of the others will tell you anything different.

Not as long as they have their minions making them rich following their B.S., you won't.
guest

Blytheville, AR

#20087 Dec 31, 2012
BARNEYII wrote:
<quoted text>
If you did not use Right Wing propaganda to rationalize your greed,
you could possibly speak and not leave the impression that you are a greedy Idiot.
If you did not use Left Wing propaganda to rationalize your greed,
you could possibly speak and not leave the impression that you are a greedy Idiot.
Realtiy Check

Little Rock, AR

#20088 Dec 31, 2012
BARNEYII wrote:
Good example;
"Obama is going to sacrifice 98% of the nation for the sake of raising taxes on 2%"
Other side of that coin;
REPUBLICAN MAJORITY (house) is going to sacrifice 98% of the nation
for the sake of not LETTING TAX CUTS EXPIRE ON THE OTHER 2%".
Here's the difference that you refuse to see. If we keep the tax rates the same for everyone then no one gets hurt and we go off the cliff and lose America. If we raise taxes on the top 2%, then few of the top 2% won't get hurt, many of the top 2% will get hurt, and we technically don't go off of the fiscal cliff but we still lose America. How you say? First off the revenue from the two percent leaves us about 95% short of what we need. Lastly, I can assure you that some of the wealthiest 2% will adjust their money so it is basically non existent and we won't get any additional tax revenue leaving the rest of the 2% to struggle to make it without bankruptcy. What liberals don't understand is that there are those that make an actual $250,000 per year then there are those who the government sees $250,000 profit in their business that don't make anywhere near $250,000 annually yet they are still counted in the 2% and will have to come up with the additional tax revenue that they don't have. They go up on their prices and business goes down because price increases knock out the bottom percentage of customers that shop with those business owners. Not to mention that the companies that supply those business owners will increase their prices. In a nut shell, business owners have most of their profits tied up in their business and not as cold hard cash in their bank accounts. It's just the way it is even if you refuse to see it.

Since: Dec 10

Washington DC

#20090 Dec 31, 2012
guest wrote:
<quoted text>Considering the tax increase won't make a dent in the deficit, and Obama has admitted that increasing taxes on the wealthy is not about cutting the deficit but about "fairness," your "other side of that coin," is wrong no matter how many times you try to flip it. But then again... you've never been about putting the right thing on here, just your "side of that coin."
"tax increase won't make a dent in the deficit"

To let the tax decrease expire on the top TWO percent would add and estimated 1.6 trillion revenue over the next decade.

Yes, I will post something that is not "right" but cheered on by the Right'

"people typically avail themselves of every legal (and not-so-legal) strategy to do so. Change the tax environment by raising rates or adversely modifying the rules, and taxpayers, especially those in the upper echelons of earners, can be counted on to modify their conduct accordingly"

Since: Dec 10

Washington DC

#20091 Dec 31, 2012
guest wrote:
<quoted text>If you did not use Left Wing propaganda to rationalize your greed,
you could possibly speak and not leave the impression that you are a greedy Idiot.
Some people confuse facts with propaganda, obviously you are one of them.

BTW, what is your stand on gun control, been couple weeks now, still waiting?

Since: Dec 10

Washington DC

#20092 Dec 31, 2012
Realtiy Check wrote:
<quoted text>
Here's the difference that you refuse to see. If we keep the tax rates the same for everyone then no one gets hurt and we go off the cliff and lose America. If we raise taxes on the top 2%, then few of the top 2% won't get hurt, many of the top 2% will get hurt, and we technically don't go off of the fiscal cliff but we still lose America. How you say? First off the revenue from the two percent leaves us about 95% short of what we need. Lastly, I can assure you that some of the wealthiest 2% will adjust their money so it is basically non existent and we won't get any additional tax revenue leaving the rest of the 2% to struggle to make it without bankruptcy. What liberals don't understand is that there are those that make an actual $250,000 per year then there are those who the government sees $250,000 profit in their business that don't make anywhere near $250,000 annually yet they are still counted in the 2% and will have to come up with the additional tax revenue that they don't have. They go up on their prices and business goes down because price increases knock out the bottom percentage of customers that shop with those business owners. Not to mention that the companies that supply those business owners will increase their prices. In a nut shell, business owners have most of their profits tied up in their business and not as cold hard cash in their bank accounts. It's just the way it is even if you refuse to see it.
Has it occurred to you that every one who makes over 250k are NOT business owners? And how many of those (business owners) are sole proprietors as opposed to business that are a corporations.

As a matter of fact, show me some verifiable numbers that show what percentage of those who make over 250k are sole proprietor business owners.

Here is your chance to add some credibility to your non sense, and prove me wrong.

Can you do it?

Since: Dec 10

Washington DC

#20093 Dec 31, 2012
Realtiy Check wrote:
<quoted text>
Here's the difference that you refuse to see. If we keep the tax rates the same for everyone then no one gets hurt and we go off the cliff and lose America. If we raise taxes on the top 2%, then few of the top 2% won't get hurt, many of the top 2% will get hurt, and we technically don't go off of the fiscal cliff but we still lose America. How you say? First off the revenue from the two percent leaves us about 95% short of what we need. Lastly, I can assure you that some of the wealthiest 2% will adjust their money so it is basically non existent and we won't get any additional tax revenue leaving the rest of the 2% to struggle to make it without bankruptcy. What liberals don't understand is that there are those that make an actual $250,000 per year then there are those who the government sees $250,000 profit in their business that don't make anywhere near $250,000 annually yet they are still counted in the 2% and will have to come up with the additional tax revenue that they don't have. They go up on their prices and business goes down because price increases knock out the bottom percentage of customers that shop with those business owners. Not to mention that the companies that supply those business owners will increase their prices. In a nut shell, business owners have most of their profits tied up in their business and not as cold hard cash in their bank accounts. It's just the way it is even if you refuse to see it.
Fact that 70% of economy is based on consumer spending.

Looking at 200 plus years of US history with your opinion in mind,

makes me wonder how in the Hell did the USA survived and become one of the most influential nations in the world,

with a tax burden, including a high of 92 percent in 1952-53 on her citizens.

Yet, 60 years later...... were still here.


Post Turtle

Ash Flat, AR

#20094 Dec 31, 2012
If obama's boots are flapping he's lying, I trust this prick about as much as I do a rattlesnake.
I hope I didn't offend any rattlesnakes.
bill t

Mountain Home, AR

#20096 Dec 31, 2012
Milita wrote:
A blogger added up the deer license sales in just a handful of states
and arrived at a striking
conclusion:
There were over 600,000 hunters this season in the state of Wisconsin ..
Allow me to restate that number: 600,000
Over the last several months, Wisconsin's hunters became the eighth
largest army in
the world.
More men under arms than in Iran.
More than France and Germany combined.
These men deployed to the woods of a single American state, Wisconsin,
to hunt with
firearms, and no one was killed.
That number pales in comparison to the 750,000 who hunted the woods of
Pennsylvania and Michigan's 700,000 hunters, all of whom have now
returned home safely.
Toss in a quarter million hunters in West Virginia and it literally
establishes the fact that the hunters of those four states alone would
comprise the largest army in the world.
And then add in the total number of hunters in the other 46 states.
It's millions more.
The point?
America will forever be safe from foreign invasion with that kind of
home-grown firepower.
Hunting... it's not just a way to fill the freezer. It's a matter of
national security.
That's why all enemies, foreign and domestic, want to see us disarmed.
Food for thought, when next we consider gun control.
Overall it's true, so if we disregard some assumptions that hunters
don't possess the same skills as soldiers, the question would still
remain...
What army of 2 million would want to face 30, 40, 50 million armed
citizens???
Obama can do it easy.
Guess Who

Ash Flat, AR

#20097 Dec 31, 2012
bill t wrote:
<quoted text>Obama can do it easy.
There was a fellow named King george a couple hundred years ago who found out just how impossible it is to disarm free men.
Redd

Little Rock, AR

#20098 Dec 31, 2012
Reality Check wrote:
<quoted text>
The problem was Obama not compromising. He won the election so he believes that he has the upper hand in this. He does but not near as much as he thinks. Obama is going to sacrifice 98% of the nation for the sake of raising taxes on 2% which doesn't even come close to fixing the problem. So the middle class and lower class will not only be crushed by increased taxes but also by the increase in the costs of goods (as if they aren't bad enough) as a result of higher taxes on the upper class that owns most of the businesses in America. It's all a part of Obama's grand plan to destroy capitalism. It would be different if the increase in taxes for the rich would actually fix the problem but it isn't even close.
Yep, Ali Akbar Hussein Obama's the debil and John Wayne Boehner's (alias "The Tan Boner") the angel.
Post Turtle

Ash Flat, AR

#20099 Dec 31, 2012
If obama's boots are flapping he's lying, I trust this prick about as much as I do a rattlesnake.
I hope I didn't offend any rattlesnakes.
Realtiy Check

Little Rock, AR

#20100 Dec 31, 2012
BARNEYII wrote:
<quoted text>
Has it occurred to you that every one who makes over 250k are NOT business owners? And how many of those (business owners) are sole proprietors as opposed to business that are a corporations.
As a matter of fact, show me some verifiable numbers that show what percentage of those who make over 250k are sole proprietor business owners.
Here is your chance to add some credibility to your non sense, and prove me wrong.
Can you do it?
That's impossible to find and you know it. There are bout 10-20 million sole proprietorships in America and I would be willing to bet that most of those will have their businesses suffer if taxes are raised. I can look at my own business and tell you that the number on our p&l statement is far greater than what is in the checkbook. On paper, we are a very strong company and in reality we are holding our own without having to go into debt or borrow money for business capital. But there isn't enough room to raise our taxes very much more before it starts causing us to have to use lines of credits. If we are hit with more taxes, it will just cause our prices to go up to cover the costs of the interest that has to be paid on lines of credit. Most business owner I talk to with the exception of a very few are doing worse off than us and a few are in the same boat as us. Unless all of the "exceptions to the rule" live in Camden then I would say that most of American small businesses are in the exact same situation. Those in the 2% that make a salary from a business and have no overhead could probably afford to pay more in taxes and not see their lives change much. The problem is that there are so few of those individuals and so many of the small business owners that will get hurt if higher taxes are enacted. Liberals don't see things that way. They see someone making $250K on paper and assume that they can afford more taxes. Reality simply doesn't play out that way. Business owners salaries are far less than the Wall Street execs that we have been thrown in the boat with in the public's eyes.
Redd

Little Rock, AR

#20101 Dec 31, 2012
Realtiy Check wrote:
<quoted text>
Business owners salaries are far less than the Wall Street execs that we have been thrown in the boat with in the public's eyes.
How would your salary compare to that of a Wal-Mart worker or say even a Fed-Ex drivers?
Guess Who

Ash Flat, AR

#20102 Dec 31, 2012
Redd wrote:
<quoted text>
How would your salary compare to that of a Wal-Mart worker or say even a Fed-Ex drivers?
all of our buisnesses are incorporated. My wife and I are the owners of the corp. The corporation writes each of us a salary paycheck of $200 each week. much less than the minium wage. Half of what we paid ourselves 4 years ago. Of course the lions share of our profit stays in the corporate account. that money is seed money & the rainy day fund. We have cut back and hunkered down for a long seige so to speak. I turned of the electric at my sales lot & shop to save a $100 per month. If I go there and need electric I crank up a generator. Its apparent the economy is faltering. Very few frieght trucks drive past anymore used to be several dozen per day. I can sell eqiptment two times per year. Once in the spring when the farmers borrow their money to put in the crop and in the fall after they harvest and sell their crop. There just isnt any extra money in the budget for most folks.

Since: Dec 10

Washington DC

#20103 Dec 31, 2012
Realtiy Check wrote:
<quoted text>
That's impossible to find and you know it. There are bout 10-20 million sole proprietorships in America and I would be willing to bet that most of those will have their businesses suffer if taxes are raised. I can look at my own business and tell you that the number on our p&l statement is far greater than what is in the checkbook. On paper, we are a very strong company and in reality we are holding our own without having to go into debt or borrow money for business capital. But there isn't enough room to raise our taxes very much more before it starts causing us to have to use lines of credits. If we are hit with more taxes, it will just cause our prices to go up to cover the costs of the interest that has to be paid on lines of credit. Most business owner I talk to with the exception of a very few are doing worse off than us and a few are in the same boat as us. Unless all of the "exceptions to the rule" live in Camden then I would say that most of American small businesses are in the exact same situation. Those in the 2% that make a salary from a business and have no overhead could probably afford to pay more in taxes and not see their lives change much. The problem is that there are so few of those individuals and so many of the small business owners that will get hurt if higher taxes are enacted. Liberals don't see things that way. They see someone making $250K on paper and assume that they can afford more taxes. Reality simply doesn't play out that way. Business owners salaries are far less than the Wall Street execs that we have been thrown in the boat with in the public's eyes.
Tell you what, this Liberal hopes not ONE of a million things that effect the price of doing business INCREASES for your business,

You just might have to close your imaginary doors.

I sure hope you do not throw that tenant out who contributes nothing to society,($600.00 a month for rent, excluded) to make a political statement.

The Loss of income forcing you to seek pubic assistance for food just like those that you think that are so far below you.



BTW- Interest rates for worthy creditors is extremely low, the Stock market is paying dividends and maintaining a steady increase........

WOW----The answer to your problems,


Get a loan at less than 4% to floor plan your (wink) business then invest your money in the stock market.

And do not even get me started on bonds..........

LMAO

Reality Check

Little Rock, AR

#20104 Dec 31, 2012
Redd wrote:
<quoted text>
How would your salary compare to that of a Wal-Mart worker or say even a Fed-Ex drivers?
Why do you ask?

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
AR More than 1,000 dead birds fall from sky in Ark (Jan '11) 2 hr freak on a leash 10,003
AR Who do you support for Treasurer in Arkansas in... (Oct '10) 2 hr KBK 218
AR Who do you support for Auditor in Arkansas in 2... (Oct '10) 5 hr KatBrownKohl 244
Crystal Due 6 hr Wondering 2
Your ambulance service sues city 6 hr Ambulance 7
City of Pocahontas - the rest of the story 8 hr guest 7
Review: Centerpoint Energy 8 hr Jerry T Boner 2
•••
•••
•••

Pocahontas Jobs

•••
•••
•••

Pocahontas People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

•••

Pocahontas News, Events & Info

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

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]
•••