Debt Ceiling Debate - Gassaway, WV

Discuss the national Debt Ceiling debate in Gassaway, WV.

Should taxing the rich be part of the agreement to raise the debt ceiling?

Gassaway undecided
Yes
 
4
No
 
4

Vote now in Gassaway:

Scotty Belknap

Charleston, WV

#1 Jul 17, 2011
We live in a great Country.If I pay 33 1/3 than the rich should too.Why does the working class have to pay it all?
Sarcasm r Us

Shinnston, WV

#2 Jul 18, 2011
Because the rich are the ones who can afford to line the politicians pockets. I know that most politicians are disreputal but it makes me sick that so many Americans watch things like Fox News and then are stupid enough to believe the venom they spew. No matter how many times they are proved to be liars, people still believe them. You don't HAVE to believe every thing you're told, its possible to think-try it, it helps.
antitax

Fairmont, WV

#3 Jul 22, 2011
If the nation needs jobs, how do we expect to create them by taking money away from the people who do the hiring?

Who ever worked for a poor person?
aaa

Craigsville, WV

#4 Jul 22, 2011
antitax wrote:
If the nation needs jobs, how do we expect to create them by taking money away from the people who do the hiring?
Who ever worked for a poor person?
bush tax cuts: 10 years strong. where are the jobs, mr. trickle-down? your logic is fallable.
So Sorry

Fairmont, WV

#5 Jul 22, 2011
antitax wrote:
If the nation needs jobs, how do we expect to create them by taking money away from the people who do the hiring?
Who ever worked for a poor person?
Maybe a system that if they want to keep all those lovely tax breaks, then they must prove that they used the tax breaks to better the economy instead of building a $100,000 dog house. The trickle down theory is just that- a theory, useless because it is dillusion at best.
antitax

Wheeling, WV

#6 Jul 25, 2011
"bush tax cuts: 10 years strong. where are the jobs, mr. trickle-down? your logic is fallable."

You're right. Taking money from the job creators would be SO beneficial at this point.

If you missed it, the economic crisis wasn't created by tax cuts. It was created by the housing crisis, brought about by the Clinton policy of giving loans to people who couldn't afford them.

But, you need to wake up and realize this isn't about Republican vs. Democrat, Liberal vs. Conservative.

It's about Government vs. The People. They ain't helping us with all those taxes, that's for sure.

And So Sorry, you're saying that you really labor for the government, and you only have a right to your money if you can prove you use it in government approved ways?

So sorry. This isn't Cuba, but if we keep going in this direction, maybe we will be.

Viva la Revolucion!
antitax

Wheeling, WV

#7 Jul 26, 2011
"The latest data show that a big portion of the federal income tax burden is shoul­dered by a small group of the very richest Americans. The wealthiest 1 percent of the population earn 19 per­cent of the income but pay 37 percent of the income tax. The top 10 percent pay 68 percent of the tab. Meanwhile, the bottom 50 percent—those below the median income level—now earn 13 percent of the income but pay just 3 percent of the taxes. These are proportions of the income tax alone and don’t include payroll taxes for Social Security and Medicare...When we compare the taxes paid under the old system with those paid after the Bush tax cuts, the rich are now actually paying a higher proportion of income taxes. The latest IRS data show an increase of more than $100 billion in tax payments from the wealthy by 2005 alone. The number of tax filers who claimed taxable income of more than $1 million increased from approximately 180,000 in 2003 to over 300,000 in 2005. The total taxes paid by these millionaire households rose by about 80 percent in two years, from $132 billion to $236 billion."

http://www.american.com/archive/2007/november...
Cryptic

Morgantown, WV

#8 Jul 28, 2011
Let me guess, you heard it from Fox News.
aaa

Craigsville, WV

#9 Jul 28, 2011
yeah... wars. forget about those? this country is broke because of financial deregulation and two burdensome wars. both parties work for the campaign contributions (it costs a lot of money to get elected). your statistics tell the whole story. the top one percent own 37 percent of the wealth. that is immoral. i don't care how you care to justify that. the bottom line is, when the rich pay more, they can't afford luxury. when the poor pay more, they can't afford food/medicine/basic needs. the rich in this country are unwilling to care for their fellow citizens. republicans are so goddamned out of whack they pledge an oath to their party before they pledge to the nation. they'd rather the country go to ruin then prosper under a democratic president. the democrats aren't any better, but at least the cause they serve is that of the meek, as opposed to the republicans, who bitch about families on welfare while supporting corporate welfare in the form of tax cuts. don't get it twisted- those individuals who have earned that great amount of wealth have done so thanks to the opportunities provided to them by this country. for this country to ask for something back is only proper. end corporate welfare.
1 post removed
antitax

Wheeling, WV

#11 Jul 29, 2011
Another item from the "Cause of the Meek" files.

1) Obama halts offshore drilling in the Gulf, eliminating American jobs.

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php...

2) Then, Obama sends $2 billion to Petrobras, an offshore drilling company in Brazil.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142405297...

3) Who happens to have a huge stake in Petrobras? The insanely wealthy George Soros.

http://www.marketwatch.com/story/soros-report...

4) Who was one of Obama's top contributors? The insanely wealthy George Soros.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/06/us/politics...

None of them, Republican or Democrat, work for you.
aaa

Craigsville, WV

#12 Jul 30, 2011
antitax wrote:
Another item from the "Cause of the Meek" files.
1) Obama halts offshore drilling in the Gulf, eliminating American jobs.
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php...
2) Then, Obama sends $2 billion to Petrobras, an offshore drilling company in Brazil.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142405297...
3) Who happens to have a huge stake in Petrobras? The insanely wealthy George Soros.
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/soros-report...
4) Who was one of Obama's top contributors? The insanely wealthy George Soros.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/06/us/politics...
None of them, Republican or Democrat, work for you.
although i agree that both parties have outstayed their welcome and have been bought off by corporate interests, this has absolutely nothing to do with the previous discussion. and please, don't mention soros unless you're going to mention the koch brothers. i think you've made it clear that you get your (dis)information from fox news. please educate yourself and seek out some legitimate journalism.
antitax

Wheeling, WV

#13 Jul 30, 2011
"although i agree that both parties have outstayed their welcome and have been bought off by corporate interests, this has absolutely nothing to do with the previous discussion. "

You're the one who brought up Bush. If it has nothing to do with the discussion, then why did you bring it up? I was talking about taxes. Apparently that wasn't good enough for you.

"and please, don't mention soros unless you're going to mention the koch brothers."

Sure! I'll mention the Koch Brothers and anyone who has a disproportionate influence on our political system. Bush was an idiot. Obama is an idiot. They're ALL idiots, don't you see? More than that...they're all EVIL. There's no reason to attack ONE without attacking them ALL. And the fact is, Bush is OVER. It's all Obama's baby now, but you want to go back three years and attack Bush's idiocy and irresponsibility while ignoring Obama's, which does NOTHING for our present situation. You're the one who wanted to make it Right vs. Left, and now I got too close to one of your sacred cows, and you want me to stop!

"i think you've made it clear that you get your (dis)information from fox news. please educate yourself and seek out some legitimate journalism. "

Oh, yeah. Here's some legitimate journalism for ya. Oh, wait...that New York Times that I cited in my previous post is really right wing, huh? I still can't figure out why they endorsed Obama in 2008. Crazy. Here's another link for you to ignore. It's not Fox News, so check it out.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/24/opinion/24f...

And NPR, don't even get me started...Joe Scarborough, uber liberal of MSNBC, said it best:

"JOE SCARBOROUGH: Well I just want to say, I love NPR and I listen to NPR, but I've been listening to reformed, pot-smoking hippies for the past thirty years on NPR with a very substantial left-wing bias - and I don't care that they eat tree bark like Euell Gibbons, and I don't care if they are still smoking pot in their sixties."

Yup. I'm just brainwashed by Fox News, even though I've just proven that my sources didn't have a conservative bias. Good job, aaa. You're really kicking butt on this one.

Fine though. I'll give you a chance to slam dunk me if you want. Tell me which of my SOURCES is wrong.(I'll give you a hint...the correct answer is NOT "Blah, blah! You watch Fox News!").

Yep. At least two of the sources I cited, and provided links for you RIGHT THERE that you could click on to READ and VERIFY for yourself were ignored. You probably didn't even look at them, did you?

Why? Because it's easier, when someone challenges you, to just play the "You watch Fox News" card. That trumps everything right? Until I post my sources for all to see. Then, you end up looking a little idiotic, like you do right now.

Just forget it buddy. Until you want to get your head out of the clouds instead of playing the stupid "Donkey's vs. Elephants" game that they WANT you to play, then you might as well just go back to playing XBox and texting on your iPhone.
aaa

Craigsville, WV

#14 Aug 1, 2011
antitax wrote:
"although i agree that both parties have outstayed their welcome and have been bought off by corporate interests, this has absolutely nothing to do with the previous discussion. "
You're the one who brought up Bush. If it has nothing to do with the discussion, then why did you bring it up? I was talking about taxes. Apparently that wasn't good enough for you.
"and please, don't mention soros unless you're going to mention the koch brothers."
Sure! I'll mention the Koch Brothers and anyone who has a disproportionate influence on our political system. Bush was an idiot. Obama is an idiot. They're ALL idiots, don't you see? More than that...they're all EVIL. There's no reason to attack ONE without attacking them ALL. And the fact is, Bush is OVER. It's all Obama's baby now, but you want to go back three years and attack Bush's idiocy and irresponsibility while ignoring Obama's, which does NOTHING for our present situation. You're the one who wanted to make it Right vs. Left, and now I got too close to one of your sacred cows, and you want me to stop!
"i think you've made it clear that you get your (dis)information from fox news. please educate yourself and seek out some legitimate journalism. "
Oh, yeah. Here's some legitimate journalism for ya. Oh, wait...that New York Times that I cited in my previous post is really right wing, huh? I still can't figure out why they endorsed Obama in 2008. Crazy. Here's another link for you to ignore. It's not Fox News, so check it out.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/24/opinion/24f...
And NPR, don't even get me started...Joe Scarborough, uber liberal of MSNBC, said it best:
"JOE SCARBOROUGH: Well I just want to say, I love NPR and I listen to NPR, but I've been listening to reformed, pot-smoking hippies for the past thirty years on NPR with a very substantial left-wing bias - and I don't care that they eat tree bark like Euell Gibbons, and I don't care if they are still smoking pot in their sixties."
Yup. I'm just brainwashed by Fox News, even though I've just proven that my sources didn't have a conservative bias. Good job, aaa. You're really kicking butt on this one.
Fine though. I'll give you a chance to slam dunk me if you want. Tell me which of my SOURCES is wrong.(I'll give you a hint...the correct answer is NOT "Blah, blah! You watch Fox News!").
Yep. At least two of the sources I cited, and provided links for you RIGHT THERE that you could click on to READ and VERIFY for yourself were ignored. You probably didn't even look at them, did you?
Why? Because it's easier, when someone challenges you, to just play the "You watch Fox News" card. That trumps everything right? Until I post my sources for all to see. Then, you end up looking a little idiotic, like you do right now.
Just forget it buddy. Until you want to get your head out of the clouds instead of playing the stupid "Donkey's vs. Elephants" game that they WANT you to play, then you might as well just go back to playing XBox and texting on your iPhone.
1. you've resorted to personal insult, and have therefore invalidated yourself.
2. your coming from every direction at once, and after some deciphering i think i'm able to determine your political position: right-leaning independent (or tea-partier, but surely you have more sense than that). very well, i'm a left-leaning independent. undestand, though, that by mentioning soros and not the koch brothers in a previous post that one can't help but associate you with the glenn beck crowd. if you're uncomfortable with this association, then don't bring up beck's talking points.
3. if you are so set in your opinions then you will recognize that same quality in others and stop this mindless political drivel.
4. this is the internet, and you're very easy to troll.
aaa

Craigsville, WV

#15 Aug 1, 2011
1. you've resorted to personal insult, and have therefore invalidated yourself.(i own neither an xbox or an iphone- but i love granola and environmental protection).
2. your coming from every direction at once, and after some deciphering i think i'm able to determine your political position: right-leaning independent (or tea-partier, but surely you have more sense than that). very well, i'm a left-leaning independent. undestand, though, that by mentioning soros and not the koch brothers in a previous post that one can't help but associate you with the glenn beck crowd. if you're uncomfortable with this association, then don't bring up beck's talking points.
3. if you are so set in your opinions then you will recognize that same quality in others and stop this mindless political drivel.
4. this is the internet, and you're very easy to troll.
Pragmatic

Fairmont, WV

#16 Aug 1, 2011
The wealthy have been receiving tax welfare since Reagan has been in office. It just got worse when old "W" took his turn. If giving the rich all these tax breaks are going to provide for jobs, why aren't there jobs now?
antitax

Fairmont, WV

#17 Aug 1, 2011
aaa - I think I can sum your position up as, "When calling someone a Fox News viewer doesn't work, switch to Glenn Beck and complain about being insulted".

You sound like you got your feelings hurt. Personal insult? Like calling me a Fox Viewer and a Glenn Beck follower and dismissing me outright? Hey, I POSTED where I got my information. You sound like you're just spouting the party line. And when I call you on it, you're whining? You don't think that ignoring the LIBERAL sources I've posted and simply calling me a Fox viewer isn't insulting? Whatever.

I understand, though. You're not used to having a debate with someone who repeatedly presents you with facts (from sources on both the LEFT AND THE RIGHT). All you know is ad hominem, guilt through association. As yet, you haven't posted one sourced fact, but you go on the offensive about where I get my information, even though I've posted where I got my info, and it AIN'T where you said.

Can you not understand why I find this all amusing?

And, you continue your personal attack even in your latest post, trying to associate me with Glenn Beck, because THAT'S ALL YOU KNOW. You haven't learned a political philosophy...you've just learned hatred of people and ideals that you've been told to hate.

It's not proper debate, and you set that tone, but you get all butt-hurt when I rightly ridicule your very-poor-to-non-existent debate skills and complete refusal to present FACTS rather than FEELINGS. I've provided sources. You haven't. So, can I conclude that you must be watching Rachel Maddow or Keith Olbermann? Can I conclude that you're so secretive with where you got your information because maybe those sources are embarrassingly biased?

If you would, go ahead and post both sets of rules for this discussion...those that apply to you, and those that apply to me. I'd be interested in seeing them.

If you want to discuss facts, I will too. But don't fling liberal pejoratives and then get whiny when some find it offensive. Above all, learn some manners.

Here's some more nasty "hate facts" for you.

As for the Bush tax cuts, unemployment was on the way up and peaked at 6.0% until the Bush tax cuts were passed in 2003.

In 2004, unemployment dropped to 5.8%
In 2005, unemployment dropped to 5.1%
In 2006, unemployment dropped to 4.6 and stayed there throughout 2007.

Then in 2008, the housing market collapsed. What did that have to do with tax cuts?

Fact is, when you force banks to lend money to high credit risks, eventually, the economy will crash IN SPITE of whatever other economic policies are in place. But to say that taxes have ANYTHING to do with the current economic crisis is laughable. And now, to suggest that the terrible mismanagement can only be corrected by WE THE PEOPLE paying MORE is disingenuous at best, and destructive at worst.

Maybe I'm wrong though. Someone should post some FACTS that prove it...
aaa

Craigsville, WV

#18 Aug 1, 2011
yawn.
antitax

Fairmont, WV

#19 Aug 1, 2011
You're right. Posting facts would require effort.

Enjoy your nap.
aaa

Craigsville, WV

#20 Aug 1, 2011
oh wow, you've figured it out. better call washington and tell them we have the solution. thanks, if only we had known it was all so simple. you're a hero. truly.

“Don't like anyone very much”

Since: Mar 12

Gassaway, WV

#21 Mar 15, 2012
The rich pay most of the taxes now. Who are the rich?

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.

Gassaway Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
jane norris (Jun '11) May 29 bigg 10
pill hill (Dec '09) May 29 yyyyyyyyy 35
pill hill jane norris May 29 yyyyyyyyy 4
matt rogers May 16 answer 2
James Randal "Randy" Skidmore (May '13) May 9 Iknow your dirt s... 5
Is Masters Pets shut down? (Nov '11) May 9 hmmm 9
what do you think of jason nottingham May 9 xyz 8
Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]