Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Romney: Obama voters are the 47% who are dependent on the government

245

Comments

  • Closed Accounts Posts: 5,175 ✭✭✭Amerika


    Agree or Disagree with Romney... Cast your Vote in the Poll. THEN SEE THE RESULTS!

    http://www.cnbc.com/id/49071984


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,076 ✭✭✭Reindeer


    Victor wrote: »
    So, where do the military, law enforcement and their hangers on (Hi, General Dynamics!) sit on this?

    Most Conservatives are perfectly fine with socialism for right wing and corporate benefit, AKA Fascism. Police forces and military complex corps fall neatly within these slots.

    The problem the US is in was not created by Obama, or even Bush, at least not directly. It was created by the wealthy, investors, banks, and corporations. You really can't say the 47% of the people are too lazy and then go and blame the economy on them, or those that politically cater tothem. The most important thing to the wealthy is making money and retaining power and influence. Greed is good, right? They have found in the last few decades that the best way to do this is to make lateral trade agreements with countries that are developing and have ridiculously low labor rates and very poor worker's rights laws, if any. Barring that, Mexico will do in a pinch. You then keep the tax burden down as low as possible, and ship those lazy American jobs overseas. Trickle down; it's more about about trickle to the east. Easy access to Health care, social services, medicare, etc etc are all enemies of the wealthy and fascism, because heaven forbid they pay 1-5% more taxes on their 0-13% rate to help make life better for a few million people. True, in a plutocracy you still want to have enough biscuits handed out to keep the poor from rioting too often, but you want those biscuits to be as dry as possible. Save the cake for the nepotism.

    The conservatives are dying. And they are dying all over the world. The middle class and the poor have too easy access to information to believe in their fascist agendas.


  • Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators Posts: 22,897 Mod ✭✭✭✭Brian?


    Amerika wrote: »
    Romney’s comments at a private fundraiser are really no different than when Barack Obama also made questionable comments at a private fundraiser when he was running for president. Barack Obama disparaged people of Pennsylvania telling his audience that we cling to our guns and religion because of our feelings about people who aren't like us, and our anti-immigrant sentiments. It didn’t seem to hurt Obama, so why should it hurt Romney? Unless of course the mainstream media dons their hypocrisy hats once again and makes more out of it than they did for Obama. And we all know the mainstream media would never do something like that, right?

    No.1 rated cable new station: Fox News.

    The station that broadcasts Bill O'Reilly, Sean Hannity et al who spend every night taking apart eveything President Obama says and adding a negative spin.

    Give up this "main stream media bias" nonsense for the sake of honest debate. The media bias strawman you try to build burned down long ago.

    they/them/theirs


    The more you can increase fear of drugs and crime, welfare mothers, immigrants and aliens, the more you control all of the people.

    Noam Chomsky



  • Closed Accounts Posts: 5,175 ✭✭✭Amerika


    No.1 rated cable new station: Fox News.

    The station that broadcasts Bill O'Reilly, Sean Hannity et al who spend every night taking apart eveything President Obama says and adding a negative spin.

    Give up this "main stream media bias" nonsense for the sake of honest debate. The media bias strawman you try to build burned down long ago.

    For the sake of honest debate, it should be noted. As an example, just recently, why haven’t reporters covering the White House asked any questions about Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius, who was last week found in violation of federal law against engaging in political activity while on the job? Or I bet you haven’t heard that internal Department of Justice emails recently obtained show Attorney General Eric Holder’s communications staff has collaborated with the left-wing advocacy group Media Matters for America, in an attempt to quash news stories about scandals plaguing Holder and his agency.


  • Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators Posts: 22,897 Mod ✭✭✭✭Brian?


    Amerika wrote: »
    For the sake of honest debate, it should be noted. As an example, just recently, why haven’t reporters covering the White House asked any questions about Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius, who was last week found in violation of federal law against engaging in political activity while on the job? Or I bet you haven’t heard that internal Department of Justice emails recently obtained show Attorney General Eric Holder’s communications staff has collaborated with the left-wing advocacy group Media Matters for America, in an attempt to quash news stories about scandals plaguing Holder and his agency.

    That should be noted when we're debating Romneys speech in the OP? No it shouldn't. If you want to debate that start a new thread. In fact you don't even have to, there's a thread on media bias already opened. Use that to build your case about media bias.

    My point, again, was: stop talking about media bias and actually debate the issue at hand: Was Romeny right or wrong to say what he said? Support your position.

    they/them/theirs


    The more you can increase fear of drugs and crime, welfare mothers, immigrants and aliens, the more you control all of the people.

    Noam Chomsky



  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 5,175 ✭✭✭Amerika


    My point, again, was: stop talking about media bias and actually debate the issue at hand: Was Romeny right or wrong to say what he said? Support your position.

    Oh bother... Media bias is part of it. As I noted earlier, the media didn't do to Obama with his Pennsylvania quote (other than Fox News who reported on it, but Fox News is also reporting on Romney, so at least they are fair and balanced), what they are doing to Ronmey and raking him over the coals. And I agree with Ronmey's assessment, as I noted before: "If you don’t pay federal income taxes, you just may not be swayed by Romney the candidate who wants to cut the income tax rates for everyone."


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,996 ✭✭✭Duck Soup


    The fall out from the remarks in the video is interesting. For a start, it does two things that strategically the Romney campaign would not have wished for. (a) It eats up pretty much the whole of this week's news cycle, with the clock counting down and no time to waste. (b) It brings the conversation back to taxes at a time when they want desperately to get the spotlight on broader economic issues.

    Then there's the tricky matter of how you respond directly to the comments. The Romney campaign has decided to double down instead of disowning them. They seem to believe that to walk back the remarks would simultaneously compound his reputation as a flip-flopper and/or disingenuous, as well as píssing off the hard right of the party who think it's one of the few good things he's said. So double-downing it is, with the hope it energizes the base to some extent.

    At this stage, I'm wondering how many times a campaign can shoot itself in the foot and still walk.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,336 ✭✭✭Mr.Micro


    Can we believe such buffoon is running for office? He will say anything to whatever crowd he is addressing, he is so shallow. Help us all in the world if this disaster on legs gets elected. He just alienated one half of the voters in a few words..... Can we take much more?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,042 ✭✭✭dublinman1990


    I hope Romney will take a look at himself in the mirror and say such things as "Why did I have to say that? Why am I such a fool?

    Well Romney you made a big fool of yourself because you offended so many of those who are employers around many US states (who work really hard to make a living), retirees and the poor so badly; you did even bother to check your facts from one proper iota.

    If I was a US Citizen and more importantly one of those who is one of the infamous 47% of people who don't pay income tax just because of their dependency from government; well I'll be highly offended at such a scandalous comment.

    And your also saying that collecting Tax is not a means of redistributing income? I am telling you now from my experience; A lot of your policies what I have read are a load of pure rubbish. They are so backward thinking; I cannot bare to keep up with them.

    I am not a voter in this election, but saying that, I don't really care. I do really hope you will lose this election Romney because I feel you deserve all the hell you can get.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 888 ✭✭✭Mjollnir


    Duck Soup wrote: »
    The fall out from the remarks in the video is interesting. For a start, it does two things that strategically the Romney campaign would not have wished for. (a) It eats up pretty much the whole of this week's news cycle, with the clock counting down and no time to waste. (b) It brings the conversation back to taxes at a time when they want desperately to get the spotlight on broader economic issues.

    Then there's the tricky matter of how you respond directly to the comments. The Romney campaign has decided to double down instead of disowning them. They seem to believe that to walk back the remarks would simultaneously compound his reputation as a flip-flopper and/or disingenuous, as well as píssing off the hard right of the party who think it's one of the few good things he's said. So double-downing it is, with the hope it energizes the base to some extent.

    At this stage, I'm wondering how many times a campaign can shoot itself in the foot and still walk.

    Like this?

    mitt-romney-shoots-himself-in-foot-via-julescator.jpg


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 175 ✭✭The Bishop!


    I hope Romney will take a look at himself in the mirror and say such things as "Why did I have to say that? Why am I such a fool?

    I think you may be giving him too much credit.

    On top of the numerous gaffes and blunders, the tax returns fiasco, peddling discredited economic policies etc etc... this is a man who strapped his dog to the roof of his car and drove 650 miles from Massachusetts to Canada on vacation.

    His actions have more than a passing resemblance to George W if you ask me.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,042 ✭✭✭dublinman1990


    I think you may be giving him too much credit.

    On top of the numerous gaffes and blunders, the tax returns fiasco, peddling discredited economic policies etc etc... this is a man who strapped his dog to the roof of his car and drove 650 miles from Massachusetts to Canada on vacation.

    His actions have more than a passing resemblance to George W if you ask me.

    I do understand most of what you have said above.

    His predecessor George W gave us a hell for the past eight years until Obama was elected. I have never suggested to give credit to Romney to a party to full of people who want to start war when people like it or not, who want to make the poor and retirees look like idiots when they don't even notice it.

    Those stances by republicans are purely immoral IMO.

    The republicans do not have a tendency to share in someone else's belief. They steal it for their own personal gain.

    I don't want another presidency where total greed is their core message.

    What I want is a huge amount of respect and dignity in this campaign. Not lies or half truths.

    And I want that better image of dignity and respect to come from the Democrats.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 5,175 ✭✭✭Amerika


    It’s interesting that Romney is being castigated for telling the truth, and Obama is winning the argument in the media because he’s a good liar, claiming the endless entitlements can be paid for by hiking taxes on the top 2 percent. For the good of the Nation, Romney should double down and keep telling the truth, no matter how much it hurts him. What’s really sad is people are actually gullible enough to believe Obama.

    And in unrelated news: The Congressional Research Service has noted that the number of able-bodied adults on food stamps doubled after Obama suspended the work requirement of Clinton’s 1996 welfare reform law.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,830 ✭✭✭Be like Nutella


    Fox is anti-Obama - FACT

    But there's a huge part of the rest of the media who are blatantly pro-Obama and do drag Romney over the coals for his gaffes. But, they are gaffes... hilarious stupid blatant no-comeback gaffes! and he's made so many at this stage he just comes across to me as a fool.... a very pompous rich unbelievably disingenuous fool. He's a complete scam of a person and incapable of the job in question... he seems barely human it's weird.

    It's true Eric Holder should be hammered in the media far more than he is and there is deffo other stuff on Obama which should be put out there to balance the thing but really though.. is it even debatable who has made more of a fool of himself so far? there's no argument - Romney has made a complete spa of himself and this is probably the worst gaffe so far in my opinion. John Stewart did a great job on it the other night if you haven't seen it I suggest you go find it! it was so vicious (and very funny if you're anti-Romney as I am).

    But I'll say it again - if it's just a question of getting Obama out then this stuff really has limited effect literally no matter how character annihilating it is! Romney could eat a baby LIVE on CNN and suffer a 2% hit! That's the world we live in that's the American two horse media circus and this republican campaign is an embarrassment to the modern world. Obama will win hopefully by 1-2% (even though I myself am not a massive fan of what he has done re: his personal Drone War for instance)

    So many American voters have been successfully sheep-dogged into black and white irrational ignorant, hate-based polar positions over this last couple of election cycles so much so that you have this crazy istuation where seemingly rational people can't possibly accept that the other side has a single good idea and that literally everything the other side says and does in completely wrong and visa versa - that is just mental... totally irrational behavior ... inhuman even. Of course both sides have some good idea and some bad ones... both sides are polluted with corporate donors and interest groups vying for their ticket to win.. it's always been that way and it hasn't change (no matter what Obama stupidly promised a carried-away emotionally driven feel good voter base last time round)

    On a personal human level Obama kicks Romney's ass completely he's just a better guy all round in my view and that is very very important as the president actually has so much personal power in the US system... as Obama has showed many times... for good and bad in my view. So on that note Obama is better for the world (esp when it comes to the Iran thing etc... not so much with the drone thing in Pakistan etc).

    On a party level - who's in power doesn't matter at all in any way to older committed Republicans - they could care less if their guy was a mixed race black/latino gay college professor as long as their party wins.

    Rest of it is just funny stuff for us (vastly more pro-democrat on this forum)
    to laugh at and poke fun... and gang up on the few reps who brave this forum and try and fight the side of their guy (in this case a very very tough job)

    and fair play to them for trying coz this Romney cat is just a complete douche... it's actually hard to believe that out of half the US population of so many brilliant thinkers, business people and academics and writers and speakers that Romney beat his way to the top of that pile with a big handful of cash and a waffle-load of appeasing shmoozy bullsh1t on the back of a disgracefully arrogant and irresponsibly selfish business career of pure wealth collection and a personality of wet cardboard that HE is the guy they ended up with... makes you lose faith that anything will ever change in this game, no matter what Obama tried to promise last time around about money and influence in Washington. It's all bullsh1t.

    Obama 2012 yay


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,996 ✭✭✭Duck Soup


    Amerika wrote: »
    It’s interesting that Romney is being castigated for telling the truth, and Obama is winning the argument in the media because he’s a good liar, claiming the endless entitlements can be paid for by hiking taxes on the top 2 percent. For the good of the Nation, Romney should double down and keep telling the truth, no matter how much it hurts him. What’s really sad is people are actually gullible enough to believe Obama.

    The problem is he's not telling the truth. 61% of people who don't pay income tax are paying payroll tax - they're the working poor. Another 20% are seniors, who've paid tax all their lives. Included in the remaining 19% are the disabled, including disabled army vets. These people make up the 47% who are Romney's moochers and takers.

    Incidentally, taking as many people out of the tax net as possible has been the policy of successive Republican and Democratic administrations, in order to make work a more attractive proposition when moving people off welfare.

    Tax people making very little money and you (a) put them further into poverty and (b) disincentivize the move from welfare to work. Good luck to Mr. Romney if he wants to stand on that platform.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 888 ✭✭✭Mjollnir


    Duck Soup wrote: »
    The problem is he's not telling the truth. 61% of people who don't pay income tax are paying payroll tax - they're the working poor. Another 20% are seniors, who've paid tax all their lives. Included in the remaining 19% are the disabled, including disabled army vets. These people make up the 47% who are Romney's moochers and takers.

    Incidentally, taking as many people out of the tax net as possible has been the policy of successive Republican and Democratic administrations, in order to make work a more attractive proposition when moving people off welfare.

    Tax people making very little money and you (a) put them further into poverty and (b) disincentivize the move from welfare to work. Good luck to Mr. Romney if he wants to stand on that platform.

    Yup. And the numbers, if anyone has the time to read them, back you up.

    Contrary to "Entitlement Society" Rhetoric, Over Nine-Tenths of Entitlement Benefits Go to Elderly, Disabled, or Working Households

    http://www.cbpp.org/cms/index.cfm?fa=view&id=3677&fb_source=message

    I find it extraordinary, but not surprising in the least, that certain posters have their BS shot down in burning flames, right before their eyes, and yet keep coming back to post the same, utterly discredited pablum over and over again.

    There is nothing new under the sun.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 5,175 ✭✭✭Amerika


    Yes, I must admit, Mitt Romney is guilty of Kinsley’s Law of Gaffes.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 5,175 ✭✭✭Amerika


    Obama 2012 yay

    Rather... Obama 2012 oy ;)


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 2,126 ✭✭✭Reekwind


    Amerika wrote: »
    Yes, I must admit, Mitt Romney is guilty of Kinsley’s Law of Gaffes.
    This wasn't a gaffe of Romney's. A gaffe is when you have a slip of the tongue or make a meal of a message. Instead this was Romney telling an audience of rich donors how he actually views the world. It was the most honest that we've seen Mitt and it spelt out, in some detail, how he perceives American society

    Welcome to the real Mitt Romney. At last


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 5,175 ✭✭✭Amerika


    Reekwind wrote: »
    This wasn't a gaffe of Romney's. A gaffe is when you have a slip of the tongue or make a meal of a message. Instead this was Romney telling an audience of rich donors how he actually views the world. It was the most honest that we've seen Mitt and it spelt out, in some detail, how he perceives American society

    Welcome to the real Mitt Romney. At last

    Resist... Resist! ;)


  • Advertisement
  • Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators Posts: 22,897 Mod ✭✭✭✭Brian?


    Duck Soup wrote: »
    The problem is he's not telling the truth. 61% of people who don't pay income tax are paying payroll tax - they're the working poor. Another 20% are seniors, who've paid tax all their lives. Included in the remaining 19% are the disabled, including disabled army vets. These people make up the 47% who are Romney's moochers and takers.
    .

    You missed another demographic: Combat troops. These moochers don't pay any federal income tax, welfare queens the lot of them.

    they/them/theirs


    The more you can increase fear of drugs and crime, welfare mothers, immigrants and aliens, the more you control all of the people.

    Noam Chomsky



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 43,313 ✭✭✭✭K-9


    Duck Soup wrote: »
    The problem is he's not telling the truth. 61% of people who don't pay income tax are paying payroll tax - they're the working poor. Another 20% are seniors, who've paid tax all their lives. Included in the remaining 19% are the disabled, including disabled army vets. These people make up the 47% who are Romney's moochers and takers.

    Incidentally, taking as many people out of the tax net as possible has been the policy of successive Republican and Democratic administrations, in order to make work a more attractive proposition when moving people off welfare.

    Tax people making very little money and you (a) put them further into poverty and (b) disincentivize the move from welfare to work. Good luck to Mr. Romney if he wants to stand on that platform.

    And with the majority of new employment minimum wage type stuff it seems you are damned if you, damned if you don't.

    Mad Men's Don Draper : What you call love was invented by guys like me, to sell nylons.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,909 ✭✭✭sarumite


    Amerika wrote: »
    It’s interesting that Romney is being castigated for telling the truth, and Obama is winning the argument in the media because he’s a good liar, claiming the endless entitlements can be paid for by hiking taxes on the top 2 percent. For the good of the Nation, Romney should double down and keep telling the truth, no matter how much it hurts him. What’s really sad is people are actually gullible enough to believe Obama.

    And in unrelated news: The Congressional Research Service has noted that the number of able-bodied adults on food stamps doubled after Obama suspended the work requirement of Clinton’s 1996 welfare reform law.

    So the truth is that the 47% who don't pay taxes all vote democrat. That of those, they all feel like "victims" with entitlement complexes. That even though the majority have jobs, are retired or military vets, they 'don't take personal responsibilty or care for themsleves'. Try telling someone who gets up everyday for work, does a hard weeks work, pays their payroll taxes and in Mitts words "not a penny more" that they don't take personal responsibility is the truth and see their response.

    He is being castigated for making a crude and false generalization of almost half the American population. Mitt was born into wealth and has never left that position, yet he feels he can speak about what people on food stamps think? He can dump them all into a narrow band. Its arrogant, obnoxious, elitist and insulting.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,830 ✭✭✭Be like Nutella


    Reekwind wrote: »
    This wasn't a gaffe of Romney's. A gaffe is when you have a slip of the tongue or make a meal of a message. Instead this was Romney telling an audience of rich donors how he actually views the world. It was the most honest that we've seen Mitt and it spelt out, in some detail, how he perceives American society

    Welcome to the real Mitt Romney. At last

    yes deffo agree... but it may even be a bit more than that too. A gaffe to most people is as you say a slip of the tongue and just messing up some situation or other with a knee jerk comment or ill thought out response but either way this would still be regarded by the media as a 'gaffe moment'... a single moment where one candidate or other shoots themselves as you say in the foot or in this case possibly directly in the face!

    but Mitt wasn't necessarily just being totally candid and himself and totally honest in this situation in my view... he was playing to the mob - in this case a room of rich people (which doesn't make them bad people!) and he needs their 50k cash (prob 500k to 1Mill between them!!!) so he was just pandering to that particular audience to get what HE wants.. exactly what he wants for exactly what he thinks they want... and THAT is the real Mitt Romney.

    A business man to the center of his sole..

    as a result of being brought up in an undiluted 100% pure capitalist family, friends and college 'culture'. It's all about the deal with Mitt. He doesn't exhibit any tendencies to really believe in almost anything at all in my view he's like a machine, purely built to win money or win benefits for himself. He sees every situation as an easy game of I do what they want - I get what I want! It matters not a damn to him whether he comes off as looking slightly insanely foolish with every bad flip flop or incomprehensibly inane move but in fact he is laughing all the way through all this because he thinks he knows how the system works to the core (and depending on how cynical you are he may in fact actually know) he's been part of it, the HAVES... as apposed to the HAVE-NOTS. He views the world as a table for the rich and well.. everyone else who serve merely to enrich those who can get it from them. He thinks there's only so much room at the table and you're either on the inside or the outside and he most assuredly is on the inside and possibly views himself as one of those few who completely understand how the inside works, how to get there and stay there and sacrifice any unworthy principles such as moral consideration for others or social responsibility for the the purpose of winning! which to him is to gain as much power and wealth as possible no matter what the greater consequences are. Greed IS great to Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan.. the difference between the two is that Paul Ryan is an idealist capitalist.. he sees a greater purpose in what he does... he's like Paul Wolfowitz, he feels he was put here to cause great changes and only he knows what the right way is, whereas Romney doesn't give a ****... he literally is laughing at us all because he knows( or believes which is the same thing to him) that money is all that matters, fukc the poor! and win or lose he's set up for life and cares not for greater purpose as Ryan at least does (even if I disagree with every ounce of his being).


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 86,683 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    Doubling down, eh.

    What did Clinton just say about doubling down the other week?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 5,175 ✭✭✭Amerika


    Overheal wrote: »
    Doubling down, eh.
    Personally I think he should triple down.
    What did Clinton just say about doubling down the other week?

    "I did not have sexual relations with that woman…. I never told anybody to lie, not a single time; never. These allegations are false."? :D


  • Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators Posts: 22,897 Mod ✭✭✭✭Brian?


    Amerika wrote: »
    Personally I think he should triple down.

    Me too, the more he does the more swing voters he loses. It's great.

    "I did not have sexual relations with that woman…. I never told anybody to lie, not a single time; never. These allegations are false."? :D


    And that negates all his achievments as President? Doesn't matter that he handed GW Bush a budget surplus, can't be respected because he got a blow job in the Oval Office.

    they/them/theirs


    The more you can increase fear of drugs and crime, welfare mothers, immigrants and aliens, the more you control all of the people.

    Noam Chomsky



  • Closed Accounts Posts: 5,175 ✭✭✭Amerika


    And that negates all his achievments as President? Doesn't matter that he handed GW Bush a budget surplus, can't be respected because he got a blow job in the Oval Office.

    Nope, just putting some humor into the Clinton "doubling down" comment (and that concerns his lying, not sexual behavior).


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 175 ✭✭The Bishop!


    Amerika wrote: »
    And in unrelated news: The Congressional Research Service has noted that the number of able-bodied adults on food stamps doubled after Obama suspended the work requirement of Clinton’s 1996 welfare reform law.

    That's unrelated alright considering the thread title.

    But seeing as you brought up the Congressional Research Service and presumably respect their nonpartisan credibility, here's something just released from them that does relate to the thread:
    A new study by the non-partisan Congressional Research Service, which reviewed nearly 65 years of US tax policy and its impact on the overall economy, has found that though cutting the effective tax rate for the nation's wealthiest is a great way to increase undesireable economic inequality, it does not—as Republican rhetoric so frequently claims—do anything to boost employment or fuel economic growth.
    The report, Taxes and the Economy: An Economic Analysis of the Top Tax Rates Since 1945, found that "the reduction in the top tax rates have had little association with saving, investment, or productivity growth. However, the top tax rate reductions appear to be associated with the increasing concentration of income at the top of the income distribution."
    http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2012/09/17-4

    What's your thoughts on that then Amerika? Do you still want to double or even triple down on a thoroughly discredited and failed economic policy?


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 5,175 ✭✭✭Amerika


    But seeing as you brought up the Congressional Research Service and presumably respect their nonpartisan credibility, here's something just released from them that does relate to the thread:



    What's your thoughts on that then Amerika? Do you still want to double or even triple down on a thoroughly discredited and failed economic policy?

    I was a bit skeptical when I read: "increase undesireable (sp) economic inequality, it does not—as Republican rhetoric so frequently claims," which you wrapped, and indicated was something from the Congressional Research Service. Just wanted to know if it is the opinion from Common Dreams – Building Progressive Community that you really wish me to comment about?


Advertisement