Pew: Romney Leads By 4 In Post-Debate Survey

Page 7 of 7 [ 97 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 3, 4, 5, 6, 7

Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Age: 53
Gender: Male
Posts: 39,428
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

19 Oct 2012, 4:11 pm

ruveyn wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:

marshall, you and others rail about Mitt Romney's 47% comment, well seems to me, you were offended by the fact someone told the truth.

Are there people that legitimately need help, yes; however there are also people that abuse the system.



Most of the 47 percent are social security recipients who for FORCED to pay into the system. In order to recover some of the money stolen from them they must sign up for the "benefits". Generally speaking the people receiving such money from the government are not parasites. More truly they are victims.

Gov. Romney misspoke when he implied the 47 percent receiving government benefits (mostly social security payments) were some how piggies feeding at the trough.

Romney is not the brightest bulb on the Xmas Tree and it would be better if he guarded his tongue. If Romney had been quieter he would have Obama on the ropes, especially after the first "debate" when Obama showed so poorly.

The way I see it, the election is Romney's to win unless he snatches defeat from the jaws of victory by utter stupidity.

ruveyn


While I don't agree with your statement that something had been "stolen" from the 47%, I still applaud you for defending them. 8)

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer



marshall
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 14 Apr 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,000
Location: Turkey

19 Oct 2012, 10:48 pm

Kraichgauer wrote:
ruveyn wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:

marshall, you and others rail about Mitt Romney's 47% comment, well seems to me, you were offended by the fact someone told the truth.

Are there people that legitimately need help, yes; however there are also people that abuse the system.



Most of the 47 percent are social security recipients who for FORCED to pay into the system. In order to recover some of the money stolen from them they must sign up for the "benefits". Generally speaking the people receiving such money from the government are not parasites. More truly they are victims.

Gov. Romney misspoke when he implied the 47 percent receiving government benefits (mostly social security payments) were some how piggies feeding at the trough.

Romney is not the brightest bulb on the Xmas Tree and it would be better if he guarded his tongue. If Romney had been quieter he would have Obama on the ropes, especially after the first "debate" when Obama showed so poorly.

The way I see it, the election is Romney's to win unless he snatches defeat from the jaws of victory by utter stupidity.

ruveyn


While I don't agree with your statement that something had been "stolen" from the 47%, I still applaud you for defending them. 8)

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


Technically all but the very top bracket are "moochers" under any even mildly progressive tax system. Hell, we could have a perfectly flat tax percentage wise and the top 1% could still call the bottom 47% moochers. I don't buy that metric though. I think Jesus had a parable where he explained the diminishing marginal value of money.



Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Age: 53
Gender: Male
Posts: 39,428
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

19 Oct 2012, 10:55 pm

marshall wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
ruveyn wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:

marshall, you and others rail about Mitt Romney's 47% comment, well seems to me, you were offended by the fact someone told the truth.

Are there people that legitimately need help, yes; however there are also people that abuse the system.



Most of the 47 percent are social security recipients who for FORCED to pay into the system. In order to recover some of the money stolen from them they must sign up for the "benefits". Generally speaking the people receiving such money from the government are not parasites. More truly they are victims.

Gov. Romney misspoke when he implied the 47 percent receiving government benefits (mostly social security payments) were some how piggies feeding at the trough.

Romney is not the brightest bulb on the Xmas Tree and it would be better if he guarded his tongue. If Romney had been quieter he would have Obama on the ropes, especially after the first "debate" when Obama showed so poorly.

The way I see it, the election is Romney's to win unless he snatches defeat from the jaws of victory by utter stupidity.

ruveyn


While I don't agree with your statement that something had been "stolen" from the 47%, I still applaud you for defending them. 8)

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


Technically all but the very top bracket are "moochers" under any even mildly progressive tax system. Hell, we could have a perfectly flat tax percentage wise and the top 1% could still call the bottom 47% moochers. I don't buy that metric though. I think Jesus had a parable where he explained the diminishing marginal value of money.


Hooray for us moochers, then!

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer



auntblabby
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Feb 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 86,512
Location: the island of defective toy santas

19 Oct 2012, 11:04 pm

and that social security & medicare-exploiting ayn rand was the moocher-in-chief! :P



Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Age: 53
Gender: Male
Posts: 39,428
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

19 Oct 2012, 11:55 pm

auntblabby wrote:
and that social security & medicare-exploiting ayn rand was the moocher-in-chief! :P


Don't tell that to Republicans or the tea baggers!

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer



GoonSquad
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 11 May 2007
Age: 49
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,959
Location: International House of Paincakes...

20 Oct 2012, 8:03 pm

marshall wrote:
Well, the problem is the market fundamentalists have their religion that tells them that competition and the laws of supply and demand always drive markets into the ideal equilibrium. Nevermind the fact that they have no hard mathematical proof that prices can ever be in equilibrium. There are actually mathematical proofs that the economy cannot be in equilibrium except under very special conditions, but that kind of math is too hard for neoclassical economists so they dismiss it and wave their hands around a lot.

Anyways, I think the big multinational corporations aren't concerned as long as they can benefit off still-growing markets in the developing world. Of course there are early signs of stagnation in China now as they are over-reliant on exports and the fraction of their population that actually have enough money to participate in the economy is not growing fast enough. That and their paranoid corrupt mass-censoring government is stifling for creative people to live under and most want to get the f*** out.

Yeah, and this is the problem. Those big corps are strip mining their western markets and stunting the growth of new markets in the east.

This can't last. Sooner or later they have to reinvest in their markets or the whole thing collapses.


I know the next place these guys want to exploit is Africa, but Africa is too politically unstable and too backward to exploit anytime soon.

The holy job creators are going to have to relearn the lesson that, in a consumer driven economy, you must pay workers enough to buy the things they produce.

They've gotten fat on cheap overseas labor and deficit funded government subsidies for their consumers for far too long. The party will be ending soon.


This is why austerity is not working in Europe. The handwriting is on the wall.


_________________
No man is free who is not master of himself.~Epictetus


marshall
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 14 Apr 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,000
Location: Turkey

20 Oct 2012, 8:57 pm

GoonSquad wrote:
marshall wrote:
Well, the problem is the market fundamentalists have their religion that tells them that competition and the laws of supply and demand always drive markets into the ideal equilibrium. Nevermind the fact that they have no hard mathematical proof that prices can ever be in equilibrium. There are actually mathematical proofs that the economy cannot be in equilibrium except under very special conditions, but that kind of math is too hard for neoclassical economists so they dismiss it and wave their hands around a lot.

Anyways, I think the big multinational corporations aren't concerned as long as they can benefit off still-growing markets in the developing world. Of course there are early signs of stagnation in China now as they are over-reliant on exports and the fraction of their population that actually have enough money to participate in the economy is not growing fast enough. That and their paranoid corrupt mass-censoring government is stifling for creative people to live under and most want to get the f*** out.

Yeah, and this is the problem. Those big corps are strip mining their western markets and stunting the growth of new markets in the east.

This can't last. Sooner or later they have to reinvest in their markets or the whole thing collapses.


I know the next place these guys want to exploit is Africa, but Africa is too politically unstable and too backward to exploit anytime soon.

The holy job creators are going to have to relearn the lesson that, in a consumer driven economy, you must pay workers enough to buy the things they produce.

They're gotten fat on cheap overseas labor and deficit funded government subsidies for their consumers for far too long. The party will be ending soon.


This is why austerity is not working in Europe. The handwriting is on the wall.


Yes, it is the elephant in the room but nobody acknowledges it. Big business has also mooched off the constant low interest loans coming out of the Fed for the past ten years. The Austrians and tea party people say that's the government's fault, that government "enables malinvestment", but don't seem to realize that raising interest rates will certainly lead to a massive double dip recession that will severely punish workers. The housing bubble was also deliberate manufactured to save the economy from collapse after the internet bubble burst. Seriously, we've reached the point where the international corporatocracy has more power than governments themselves. They can effectively hold governments and central banks hostage and suck them dry. Yet nobody will admit that obvious because it's just too damn scary and it's way easier to blame powerless politicians.