| We hope you enjoy your visit. You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Join our community! If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
| Barack Obama Speaks On Economy At Cooper Union | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Mar 27 2008, 09:25 AM (607 Views) | |
| Dandandat | Mar 27 2008, 09:25 AM Post #1 |
|
Time to put something here
|
I was listening to this speech today on my way into work, while it started off a bit rocky it started to appeal to me about 10minets in. He took a shoot at the Clinton's by saying the current economic poblems where born under their adminstration, which I wonder if he would have other wise admit too if he did not need to set himself apart from Clintion at this time. |
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| Admiralbill_gomec | Mar 28 2008, 11:50 AM Post #2 |
|
UberAdmiral
|
"financial equality" sounds too much like Socialism to me. I read the speech. I was not impressed either by the speech or his "knowledge" of economics. I found the dig at Hillary amusing. EDIT: I prefer to read his speeches instead of listen to them. Primarily because I get a better sense of what he is talking about, and dont' get swept up in the oratory "skills." |
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| RTW | Mar 28 2008, 12:19 PM Post #3 |
![]()
Vice Admiral
|
Since he's one of the few receiving that unequal distribution of excess perhaps he can shed some light on what illicit and immoral methods he used? |
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| Admiralbill_gomec | Mar 28 2008, 01:42 PM Post #4 |
|
UberAdmiral
|
^^^ But don't you understand? It's the evil corporations acting all... corporation-ey! |
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| Dandandat | Mar 28 2008, 01:50 PM Post #5 |
|
Time to put something here
|
Well when people like hedge fund managers are the top earns in the country but pay a less percentage in tax then the rest of us, what he says makes some sense. This reminds me of two guys I read about recently, they both lost their jobs doe to the financial difficulties of the past year. One lost his job when the factory he worked hard for closed down, the other was let go after losing his company a lot of money.
|
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| Admiralbill_gomec | Mar 31 2008, 09:27 AM Post #6 |
|
UberAdmiral
|
One problem with our capitalistic society is that we can't please everyone. While I'm sorry for the guy who lost his factory job, that's his responsibility, not the government's. As for the guy who lost his job at Merrill Lynch, he should have been canned long ago. I will double check to ensure that none of my mutuals hold Alcoa. O'Neal is a shareholder problem. This is why I always vote my proxies. Also nothing Obama and his leviathan big government ideas should be sticking his nose into. As for paying a lesser percentage, he still pays MORE total. That sounds a bit like class envy. Personally, I think I pay way too much. I'm in the top bracket, can't use a mortgage deduction, and am sheltering as much income as I'm allowed every year in my SEP IRA. Do I care if someone pays a lower percentage than I do but makes more? Not really. |
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| Dandandat | Mar 31 2008, 10:17 AM Post #7 |
|
Time to put something here
|
Well I do, and it's not class envy, simply what's fare and not fare. If everyone else in the country pays a certain tax on their "income", yet a whole group of people side step this by categorizing their "Income" as "investment" there is a problem. It doesn’t matter if they pay more or lese, it doesn’t matter if the tax code itself is unfair in other ways. In this one regard it is wrong and should be corrected. When Obama refers to such practices I can not do anything but agree with him. I would also say that Jeffrey Evans plight is a shareholder issue as it is his own. Since you feel sorry for the guy that must mean there is something wrong with the situation, otherwise why feel sorry? But why didn't you categories it as something shareholders can also take responsibility for as you did O'Neal? Labor is more then just a line item on the income statement, but more often then not they are simply seen as nothing more then a resource not unlike capital equipment. As for O'Neal and being a shareholder issue I would agree; but his actions hurt more then just shareholders. It hurt people tied to Merrill Lynch as customers and it has compounded current market conditions that are affecting everyone. Further still not all shareholders are created equal, not everyone invested in Merrill Lynch lost do to O'Neals actions, and I would be willing to bet that many of those responsible for his severance package were not that displeased with him when they set up those funds and he was making the decisions that has lead to the current end. As often is true in such situation the CEO isn’t the only one making the bad decisions and his termination is nothing more then a 'show'. |
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| Admiralbill_gomec | Mar 31 2008, 10:57 AM Post #8 |
|
UberAdmiral
|
Even though Obama does it too? Oh, and as far as what is fair and what isn't, life isn't fair. I've said this I don't know how many times, but YOU CAN NOT PLEASE EVERYONE. Lefty plans for fairness usually involve penalizing others. No thanks. This is one reason why I take everything I read from Obama and Hillary with an enormous grain of salt. |
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| Dandandat | Mar 31 2008, 11:22 AM Post #9 |
|
Time to put something here
|
Obama lives under the same rules as we all, and currently the system is set up so that "investment" income is taxed at a lower rate then other forms of income. You can't blame Obama for following the current rules and call him a hypocrite when he says he wants to change them. If he doesn’t change them once he is in office, you would have a point. But at this stage it is irrelevant whether he gained from it prior to having the power to change it. If you don’t believe him that is of course a different mater and one every voter has to deal with. Also yes, life is not fare; but that is not an excuse for not trying to make it so. |
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| Admiralbill_gomec | Mar 31 2008, 12:08 PM Post #10 |
|
UberAdmiral
|
^^^ The problem is, Dante, Obama's plans don't make anything more fair for anyone, just less fair for others. As I said, no thanks. |
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| Dandandat | Mar 31 2008, 12:14 PM Post #11 |
|
Time to put something here
|
You would have to quantify that of course. |
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| Admiralbill_gomec | Mar 31 2008, 12:56 PM Post #12 |
|
UberAdmiral
|
I'll just quantify it by saying "soak the rich" which is what I read from Obama's speech. You like what he said. Fine. I don't. Why? Because his idea of "faiiiirrrrrrness" is to raise taxes on the better off and give it to people who just don't pay income tax. As I said, for the last time... NO THANKS. That's typical of he and his ilk. I just won't vote for this phony a**clown. |
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| Dandandat | Mar 31 2008, 01:17 PM Post #13 |
|
Time to put something here
|
That's not a quantification its rhetoric. |
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| Admiralbill_gomec | Mar 31 2008, 01:50 PM Post #14 |
|
UberAdmiral
|
No, it is an OPINION, based on his speech and previous behavior of he and his party.
|
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| Dandandat | Mar 31 2008, 02:08 PM Post #15 |
|
Time to put something here
|
Rhetoric is often based on opinion, and is often the sighting of opinion with out explanation or example to back up said opinion. |
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · Politics and World Events Forum · Next Topic » |



9:32 AM Jul 11