The Tea Party - Page 42 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 04-20-2010, 12:25 AM   #616
Refugee
 
U2387's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Boston
Posts: 2,217
Local Time: 04:50 AM
Quote:
Could you please inform us how many militias were charged with this single act of violence?
I was 8 goddamn years old at the time and I know that McVeigh was motivated by the anti government ideology of any number of militias who espouse the same and praised and supported him.

Stop with the b.s. It is getting old.


Quote:
I don’t put it past either side to take full advantage of a few whackos.
That is a response to my pointing out record investigations of death threats by the independent, nonpartisan secret service? I am confused.

Obama is not instructing them to investigate this shit to take advantage of the fact that some whackos are trying to kill him to gain sympathy with voters.

The guys with the training, the guns and The Escalades are a serious bunch and they don't roll with the political climate by any means.

Again, use your common sense. There has been an extreme surge in anti government, white supremacist violence, the same kind that influenced Oklahoma City. Only now it is directed in many ways at the President.

Other people here post non sense, and I have seen enough of it over time!

You have the record that I have seen for the most amount of non sense in the shortest period of time right now.
__________________

__________________
U2387 is offline  
Old 04-20-2010, 12:25 AM   #617
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
AEON's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: California
Posts: 4,052
Local Time: 02:50 AM
Apparently the Tea Party is not the only group that doesn't trust the government in Washington.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000...408991442.html

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wall Street Journal - April 19, 2010
This is not the case today. Just 22% say they can trust the government in Washington almost always or most of the time, among the lowest measures in half a century.

Opinions about elected officials are particularly poor. Just 25% have a favorable opinion of Congress while 65% have an unfavorable view—the lowest favorable ratings for Congress in more than two decades of Pew Research center surveys.
__________________

__________________
AEON is offline  
Old 04-20-2010, 12:30 AM   #618
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
AEON's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: California
Posts: 4,052
Local Time: 02:50 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by U2387 View Post
I was 8 goddamn years old at the time and I know that McVeigh was motivated by the anti government ideology of any number of militias who espouse the same and praised and supported him.
Stop with the b.s. It is getting old.
This topic is apparently unsettling to you - and emotions tend to cloud reason instead of aiding it.

Legally and morally, being frustrated with the government and blowing up a building are not the same thing.
__________________
AEON is offline  
Old 04-20-2010, 12:46 AM   #619
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
AEON's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: California
Posts: 4,052
Local Time: 02:50 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by U2387 View Post
Sense of humor fallen flat, no.

Sense of reality, yes.

Where in God's creation do you get such b.s. like we have gone from 18% revenue/GDP to 30%?
Here is an interesting source:
Congressional Budget Office - Home Page

Quote:
Tax revenues have averaged approximately 18.3% of gross domestic product (GDP) over the past 40 years, generally ranging plus or minus 2% from that level- wiki citing that source
And oecd.org is another source…
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development
__________________
AEON is offline  
Old 04-20-2010, 12:48 AM   #620
Refugee
 
U2387's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Boston
Posts: 2,217
Local Time: 04:50 AM
[QUOTE=AEON;6736595]This topic is apparently unsettling to you - and emotions tend to cloud reason instead of aiding it.[QUOTE]

No, your absurdity is unsettling to me.

Don't tell me anything about reason and how it is clouded after you have made the claim that revenue/GDP has gone up 12 percentage points in just one year!

Quote:
Legally and morally, being frustrated with the government and blowing up a building are not the same thing.
No shit, really?

Where did I ever say that?

Twist the argument to fit your own convenience and then "rebut it," you are no different than most of the rest of the Republicans in here.

Again, logically, Aeon, the same kind of militant(not just general) frustration with government that we see expressed in record numbers now was what motivated McVeigh and Nichols(the only morally and legally accountable parties, I agree).

I have no problem with criticism of government, you saw me criticize Obama just a few posts ago for the Henry Louis Gates Situation.

What non political law enforcement and secret service agencies are worried about, rightly, is the surge in anti government, militant ideology and violence.

Unless you want to argue that this is not on a frightening upswing of late, we have nothing more to discuss!
__________________
U2387 is offline  
Old 04-20-2010, 12:51 AM   #621
Refugee
 
U2387's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Boston
Posts: 2,217
Local Time: 04:50 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by AEON View Post
Here is an interesting source:
Congressional Budget Office - Home Page
Yes, and nowhere does it make the claim that we are now at 30% revenue/GDP!

The deficit is going up, tell us something we do not know!

Obama is responsible for only a tiny fraction of this structural deficit, and he has already done a good amount to address the issue.

If you are still going to try and make this claim, against all economic or common sense, then you may as well bring a tin foil hat with you!

Again, if revenues are weak, taxes have fallen and GDP is steady or increasing very little, than we have a smaller numerator with slightly bigger or the same denominator. How does that yield 12 more percentage points?



Quote:
And oecd.org is another source…
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and

Development
Yes, and again, it does not back up your b.s. initial claim.

You do realize that something cataclysmic, seismic, unprecedented would have to have happened for there to be a movement of 12 percentage points in either direction on revenue/GDP, right?
__________________
U2387 is offline  
Old 04-20-2010, 01:15 AM   #622
Refugee
 
U2387's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Boston
Posts: 2,217
Local Time: 04:50 AM
Aeon, it has to be something else with you, because you are resorting to statistics that are made up and completely out of whack as well as trying to deny the increase in the presence of militia violence in our country.

Neither can be done.

If you want to criticize Obama or the Democrats or anyone else, just do it in good faith. If you truly do not like the policies, then you should be able to discuss them without outright falsehoods.

What you are doing amounts to the same argument as "our civilization as we know it will end because of Obama." "Why," others ask. Because we said so.

Don't be absurd.
__________________
U2387 is offline  
Old 04-20-2010, 01:23 AM   #623
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
AEON's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: California
Posts: 4,052
Local Time: 02:50 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by U2387 View Post
Yes, and nowhere does it make the claim that we are now at 30% revenue/GDP!
Maybe it is just my interpretation – but your use of exclamation marks, all caps, and cursing come across a someone taking personal offense by someone daring to disagree with your long (and a tad bit recycled) posts. You asked for numbers, and I’m giving you the numbers - as well as the sources behind those numbers. You’re free to question them – I did not do the accounting myself. I tend to trust the OECD and CBO, but I can understand if someone did not.

To clarify - I don't believe I said it happened in one year. If I did say this – it wasn’t my intention. It’s common knowledge this has been a trend that started well before Obama. Again, I think it is the general opinion that the trend will accelerate – a reasonable concern in light of the current crises and follow up spending bills. If it continues to accelerate – let’s say into the high 30’s and 40’s – we might be in serious trouble. Smaller countries might be able to deal with such a high level – the United Sates economy may not cope so well.

The OECD report states that it the US revenue to GDP was 28.3 percent in 2008. I did not see 2009 information in the PDF but I would wager 2009 and 2010 are the same or worse.
__________________
AEON is offline  
Old 04-20-2010, 02:40 AM   #624
Refugee
 
U2387's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Boston
Posts: 2,217
Local Time: 04:50 AM
Quote:
Maybe it is just my interpretation – but your use of exclamation marks, all caps, and cursing come across a someone taking personal offense by someone daring to disagree with your long (and a tad bit recycled) posts. You asked for numbers, and I’m giving you the numbers - as well as the sources behind those numbers. You’re free to question them – I did not do the accounting myself. I tend to trust the OECD and CBO, but I can understand if someone did not.
I gave you the official federal revenue and GDP numbers for 2009, divided them and got 13.86% and linked to my source.

I have the facts.

You have numbers that you misunderstand and are trying to use to back up your opinions.

Look, you are not disagreeing with me. We have not even been in an argument on the merits of any issue.

What you are doing is putting out 2 different numbers, calculated differently by different methods and using the lower one that favors you for the period before Obama, and using the higher one for after Obama. That is all. If you consistently use OECD or consistently use CBO, you will find NO INCREASE or a DROP in 2009 for taxes as a percentage of GDP!

I will give you the benefit of the doubt and say you don't understand the issue, because I do not want to accuse you of intentionally changing the calculation mid game on us!

I am giving the correct numbers and actually explaining why they are correct!

That is not long winded or recycled posting, my friend!

Again, you are showing no understanding of the issue. You use CBO statistics which, calculating by their method for 09 shows 13.86% and then compare them to OECD statistics, which are calculated completely differently, to try and claim a big increase.


Neither OECD nor CBO has shown any kind of increase in the tax as % of GDP of the United States of late.

The OECD and CBO aren't making the same claims as you are!

CBO in no way shape or form says we are anywhere near 30%

OECD calculates completely differently than we do. They include state, local and federal taxes and add them in, they include other things that we do not include. Their numbers, not the ones we use to calculate it, have been pretty consistently between 25 and 28 since 1980, so where is the big increase?


Quote:
To clarify - I don't believe I said it happened in one year. If I did say this – it wasn’t my intention. It’s common knowledge this has been a trend that started well before Obama. Again, I think it is the general opinion that the trend will accelerate – a reasonable concern in light of the current crises and follow up spending bills. If it continues to accelerate – let’s say into the high 30’s and 40’s – we might be in serious trouble. Smaller countries might be able to deal with such a high level – the United Sates economy may not cope so well.

The OECD report states that it the US revenue to GDP was 28.3 percent in 2008. I did not see 2009 information in the PDF but I would wager 2009 and 2010 are the same or worse.
This is just not true, I am sorry.

You are still claiming this trend is accelerating, when I have shown you clearly it is dropping. You don't even need numbers, just, once again, common sense. Taxes decreasing, revenue decreasing, GDP staying the same or growing slightly, it does not work out. Again, non partisan Tax Foundation estimates that even if Obama's tax increases go through in their entirety, we are unlikely to move up in this category by any noticeable amount! Bigger tax increases in the past, again, have not even registered on the radar screen. So it is not rising, I don't know where you are getting this!

Are you sure you are not confusing this trend with the rising trend in deficits as a percentage of GDP? Of course, that can't be sustained, and we are addressing it.

I will be repetitive on these points until you acknowledge you are spinning!

The claim you made was that we were always sitting around 18% and we are now at 30%.

You said we were at 18%(which is where we have been for a while now) and NOW we are at 30.

So I made the logical conclusion(of course using the same source calculated with the same method) that it had to have happened in a year, unless there is some change in the numbering of years that I am not aware of.

What is between 2008 and 2009? How many years?

Again, logic. How could the trend of tax% of GDP have started to accelerate upwards long before Obama when Clinton, after a modest tax hike in 1993 kept cutting, cutting cutting, and Bush II did the same?

The tax bite as a percentage of GDP was the lowest in history in 2003. Bush kept cutting.

Obama has cut so far and is proposing modest increases in the future.

Lets acknowledge this little bit of common sense now, AEON! How could tax/revenue percentages be increasing if taxes have been cut and revenues have dropped off a cliff? Again, that numerator decreasing/denominator stable or increasing logic that you have not acknowledged yet, even though I pointed it out 3 times.

So the CBO and all other internal numbers that simply look at federal revenues to GDP and get the percentage will hold us right around 18% for the foreseeable future!

The OECD, with whatever metric they use, will keep us around 25-30%, where we have always been! Whatever numbers you use, the big increase has not happened!

At least acknowledge to me right now that you understand the difference in how the 2 sources calculate the numbers. That is important.

Moral of the story:

You can't work it out like this:

CBO 2000-2008- 17-18%

OECD 2000-2008-25-28%

2009

CBO:13.86%

OECD: probably a little less than 25% given how they calculate and the fact that revenues are down.

Now you move on to make your original claim:
Quote:
"We have always been right around 18%, now we are approaching 30%, and that gets us fiscal conservatives shaking in our boots."(paraphrase)
FYM, what is he doing?

He is selecting the CBO statistic to use for pre-Obama and the OECD statistic to use post-Obama.

He is not being consistent, as neither show an increase.

He is changing the METHOD OF CALCULATION, changing the rules mid game, to make it LOOK LIKE there is some big bad policy change that has caused this of late!

Again, AEON, and this is key, you have to now acknowledge that you did this, and that you realize that there is no way such a large increase could take place absent a MAJOR, MAJOR incident, like doubling of the tax rate all around plus a big gas tax plus finding a pot of gold!

Bottom line, if both CBO and OECD are consistent throughout the last decade or two and we compare periods without changing the method of calculation mid game and hoping no one notices, revenue(taxes) as a percentage of GDP are either stable or falling!!
__________________
U2387 is offline  
Old 04-20-2010, 02:50 AM   #625
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
AEON's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: California
Posts: 4,052
Local Time: 02:50 AM
Another interesting note...the Congressional Budget Office (not Heritage) estimates that the gross debt will rise from 70.2% of GDP in 2008 to 100.6% in 2012...

http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/100xx/doc...dentBudget.pdf
__________________
AEON is offline  
Old 04-20-2010, 02:54 AM   #626
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
AEON's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: California
Posts: 4,052
Local Time: 02:50 AM
The phrase "always been" and the word "historical" do not mean the same thing.
__________________
AEON is offline  
Old 04-20-2010, 03:04 AM   #627
Refugee
 
U2387's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Boston
Posts: 2,217
Local Time: 04:50 AM
Quote:
The OECD report states that it the US revenue to GDP was 28.3 percent in 2008. I did not see 2009 information in the PDF but I would wager 2009 and 2010 are the same or worse.
I will leave you alone after this, but again, is your calculator broken. For the final time.

2008 to 2009 has led us to a big drop in revenues, and there has been a substantial tax cut.

This cuts our numerator

GDP in this time period has fallen a bit, then risen a bit(mid 2009 the recovery started) so lets say it is stable overall.

This keeps our denominator the same

Smaller numerator, plus the same denominator, or in the case of 2010, a growing denominator, will yield a LOWER PERCENTAGE.

SIMPLE MATH.

Just acknowledge this stuff, and move on to a discussion based on the merits of issues.

Just because you acknowledge that Obama has not raised our collective tax bite 12 percentage points does not mean that you in any way, shape or form can't disagree with his policies!
__________________
U2387 is offline  
Old 04-20-2010, 03:05 AM   #628
Refugee
 
U2387's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Boston
Posts: 2,217
Local Time: 04:50 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by AEON View Post
Another interesting note...the Congressional Budget Office (not Heritage) estimates that the gross debt will rise from 70.2% of GDP in 2008 to 100.6% in 2012...

http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/100xx/doc...dentBudget.pdf
Marvelous, remember GW Bush and the hole this recession that happened on his watch has blown in it!

Obama's policies have contributed about $300 billion total to this, once you factor in the revenue saved by the stimulus.

The recession loses revenue at the same time it automatically spends federal money on unemployment benefits, etc. This mechanism, plus the already existing Bush tax cuts and Iraq war, prescription drug benefit, health care costs, etc is what is responsible for most of the increase.

Obama is actually doing something about it.

He does not have it easy, it will not be easy, but it would have been the same or worse under the Republicans.
__________________
U2387 is offline  
Old 04-20-2010, 03:06 AM   #629
Refugee
 
U2387's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Boston
Posts: 2,217
Local Time: 04:50 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by AEON View Post
The phrase "always been" and the word "historical" do not mean the same thing.
Stop with this.

My point is we have been stable in this area over the last 2 decades or so and are now dropping, that much is clear.

ADMIT YOU CHANGED THE CALCULATION INTENTIONALLY or that you do not know what you are talking about and move on!

I am not going around in circles with you over stupid crap like the difference between 2 words I used in a posting.

I will not discuss 2 words or anything more with you until you acknowledge that you did not understand the difference between 2 methods of calculation, and that your entire claim defies any common sense whatsoever.
__________________
U2387 is offline  
Old 04-20-2010, 03:51 AM   #630
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
AEON's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: California
Posts: 4,052
Local Time: 02:50 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by U2387 View Post
I will leave you alone after this...
Oh, I don't mind. The bright colors and extra large fonts you use while questioning my integrity and intelligence are slightly amusing. Of course, I’ve become a tad bit used to it in FYM over the years. However, occasionally, rational discourse does take place and a good point is acknowledged. Most people in here understand that each of us has limited time and cannot answer every question in the depth it probably deserves – or we try to answer a few questions from different people with one post in the hopes it covers the general idea of our premise. We also try our best with the resources and time available to add weight to the thoughts we share. Occasionally, I will dust off old college books – otherwise I will go online for sources. The truth is – both sides of just about any argument can find sources to back up their opinion.

You seem like an educated, passionate young person. I am personally not a big fan of passion. Too much passion is too much emotion, and we cannot control our minds (and most especially our words) when we are ruled by emotion. From the great Epictetus, “No one is free who is not master of himself.”

You can ignore what Epictetus is saying here (which is mirrored in the great teachings of Buddhism, Christianity, Gnosticism…etc) or you can step back – and really consider what that means. Even though we are online, and I can’t see your face – the real you is shining through. And I don’t imagine you want to be the type of person that shouts his opinions with a blow horn and quickly judges the integrity of his opponents. Such a person will eventually look around…and find that nobody is listening.
__________________

__________________
AEON is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Obama General Discussion diamond Free Your Mind Archive 1009 06-28-2010 01:03 AM
Sarah Palin resigns as Governor VintagePunk Free Your Mind Archive 1005 04-05-2010 05:30 PM
Elevation Canada 8th Anniversary Party February 19th bradyvox Interference Gatherings 22 02-20-2010 05:30 PM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:50 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com