Understanding the Issues: Education

[saden1]

Originally Posted by That Guy

not really, since obama is so willing to really jack up tax rates and his foreign policy statements overall haven't been very good (and prove a lack of experience with how the world works). I still don't think the "aura of change" is going to matter much once congress opens if he's in charge. It might help him push through a few issues early, but i don't think it'll hold up too well unless he can flip the economy into a strong boom within 18 months due to his policies, which i REALLY don't see happening.

either candidate will be better on science than bush though, so false "studies" with badly tainted/wrong "scientific results" should decrease either way, which i'm really looking forward to. both will probably do a little work on lobbyists reform or whatnot, which will be welcome, though minor.

Unless I am not privy to some information you are my understanding is that he is going to "jack up" the tax rate on the top 2% of income earners. These are the same people who hardly pay the same tax rate as middle class Americans.

As for his foreign policy statements, what exactly rubs you the wrong way? I mean, seriously, should we continue to plug a square peg in a round hole? Whatever we're currently doing isn't working so shouldn't we try something difference? Talking to people isn't naive, it's the most sensible thing to do. Even if you don't get anywhere by talking it doesn't mean you shouldn't try. "Bomb bomb bomb" doesn't work.

I don't get all the experience talk either. I mean, no one in their right mind hires someone based on experience alone. You can have all the experience in the world and still be a worthless POS. It's policy, policy, policy!

p.s. Greg Brown has experience...I would throw that mother f*cker under the bus, over the bridge, and if possible, in the lion's den at the zoo.

[steveo395]

Originally Posted by saden1

Unless I am not privy to some information you are my understanding is that he is going to "jack up" the tax rate on the top 2% of income earners. These are the same people who hardly pay the same tax rate as middle class Americans.

Every Democrat running for President wants to raise taxes on "the rich," but they will have to do something miraculous to outtax President Bush. Based on the latest available tax data, no Administration in modern history has done more to pry tax revenue from the wealthy.

The rich pay a higher rate than middle class Americans. The top 1% earns 21% of the income, but pays 39% percent of the taxes. That means they are paying a higher rate than the people below them. Bush did lower the tax rates for these people, but the amount of taxes they paid has increased. Raising taxes does not raise tax revenue. When the taxes are lower, the economy does much better and there is more total income. The rich people are the ones creating the jobs. The more you tax them, the more it will hurt the economy.

Last week the Congressional Budget Office joined the IRS in releasing tax numbers for 2005, and part of the news is that the richest 1% paid about 39% of all income taxes that year. The richest 5% paid a tad less than 60%, and the richest 10% paid 70%. These tax shares are all up substantially since 1990, and even somewhat since 2000. Meanwhile, Americans with an income below the median -- half of all households -- paid a mere 3% of all income taxes in 2005. The richest 1.3 million tax-filers -- those Americans with adjusted gross incomes of more than $365,000 in 2005 -- paid more income tax than all of the 66 million American tax filers below the median in income. Ten times more

Obama also wants to raise the capital gains tax, even though more tax revenue comes from it when the tax rate is lower.

The amount of capital gains declared on tax forms has doubled since the tax rate was cut to 15% from 20% in 2003, which has also contributed to more Americans being "rich." Dividend income has also increased by at least 50% since that rate was cut to 15% from nearly 40% in 2003.

This is a very good article about taxes.
Taxes and Income - WSJ.com


...sorry about this being off-topic.

[That Guy]

Originally Posted by saden1

Unless I am not privy to some information you are my understanding is that he is going to "jack up" the tax rate on the top 2% of income earners. These are the same people who hardly pay the same tax rate as middle class Americans.

As for his foreign policy statements, what exactly rubs you the wrong way? I mean, seriously, should we continue to plug a square peg in a round hole? Whatever we're currently doing isn't working so shouldn't we try something difference? Talking to people isn't naive, it's the most sensible thing to do. Even if you don't get anywhere by talking it doesn't mean you shouldn't try. "Bomb bomb bomb" doesn't work.

I don't get all the experience talk either. I mean, no one in their right mind hires someone based on experience alone. You can have all the experience in the world and still be a worthless POS. It's policy, policy, policy!

p.s. Greg Brown has experience...I would throw that mother f*cker under the bus, over the bridge, and if possible, in the lion's den at the zoo.

talking to our enemies while bombing our allies (iran/pakistan) then later pulling back on talking to iran. his foreign policy outside of a massively oversped pull out (another bad idea) seems very haphazard, and he's had to re-state and change his opinion on an awful lot of ideas.

I only brought up his inexperience (and only in the context of foreign policy) because it's very obvious and it's made him look stupid a number of times.

as far as tax rates, it's not just the top 2% and it's not just a minor deal. he wants f'ing socialized medicine - do you have any idea what that costs? either its insanely expensive or it's worthlessly bad (ask the swedes or brits about it). the japanese have a sorta decent idea (you pay 100% upfront, the gov pays you 80% back - so if you try to defraud them, you can get yourself royally screwed and it limits exposure to the million dollar a day cases) but it'll never be cheap or paid for solely by minor tax hikes on the top 2%.

it seems like you like obama a whole lot, but he has flaws, and using strawman to try and cover them up is pretty weak.

[saden1]

Originally Posted by That Guy

talking to our enemies while bombing our allies (iran/pakistan) then later pulling back on talking to iran. his foreign policy outside of a massively oversped pull out (another bad idea) seems very haphazard, and he's had to re-state and change his opinion on an awful lot of ideas.

I only brought up his inexperience (and only in the context of foreign policy) because it's very obvious and it's made him look stupid a number of times.

as far as tax rates, it's not just the top 2% and it's not just a minor deal. he wants f'ing socialized medicine - do you have any idea what that costs? either its insanely expensive or it's worthlessly bad (ask the swedes or brits about it). the japanese have a sorta decent idea (you pay 100% upfront, the gov pays you 80% back - so if you try to defraud them, you can get yourself royally screwed and it limits exposure to the million dollar a day cases) but it'll never be cheap or paid for solely by minor tax hikes on the top 2%.

it seems like you like obama a whole lot, but he has flaws, and using strawman to try and cover them up is pretty weak.

Iran isn't our allies and Pakistan is a dictatorship we're prepping-up.

Yes I like Obama but I have some misgivings as well. Him getting up there in front of AIPAC and pandering bothered me. One part of me thinks it's just politics, another see this as a sign of things to come. I'll admit that he is not perfect but when I look at McCain and Hillary he is certainly the "lesser of the three evils."

I'd also like to add that McCain has all the experience in the world but when you look at his overall policy I really wonder how he is any difference from Bush. If people are happy with Bush that's fine but don't tell me policy wise McCain is going to be better for America than Bush or has new ideas.

As for Japan's health care system, I couldn't find any information to support your claim. I did however find this and this. Sounds like a good universal health care system to me (control prices, allow flexibility and works for everyone).

Who provides health care in Japan?
Japan has a system of universal health coverage, although individuals may receive coverage quite differently. It can be divided into two broad categories: National Health Insurance and Employees’ Health Insurance. Membership in either program is compulsory. According to the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, private health insurance is rarely utilized in Japan.

Employee Health Insurance covers people who are working for medium to large companies; national or local government; or private schools. There is also a government-managed program within this plan for employees of small businesses. Premiums are based on monthly salary (excluding bonuses) and half is paid by the employer, half by the employee. The average contribution is around 4% of the person’s salary. Those covered under Employee Health Insurance pay 20% of their medical costs when hospitalized and 30% of the costs for out-patient care. Co-payments may also be required for prescription drugs. Costs are shared by the patients up to a certain ceiling, after which they receive full coverage. In case of long-term illness, the patients or the patients’ spouse receive an allowance based on their salary; in case of death, an allowance for the funeral is also paid.

National Health Insurance covers workers in agriculture, forestry, or fisheries, those that are self-employed, and those not employed (including expectant mothers, students, retirees, etc). “A working mother, for example, would withdraw from her company’s insurance and join the National scheme in her local ward or city. The local office provides a lump sum towards childbirth costs (on average around 300,000 yen) and a small monthly allowance afterwards.” Under this plan the insured pay 30% of in- or out-patient costs, as well as co-payments for prescription drugs. Similarly to the Employee Health Insurance program, patients share costs up to a certain ceiling, after which point they receive full coverage. Premiums are based on salary, property, and dependents; on average, the premiums are about 4% of salary. Coverage includes sickness, injury, necessary dental work, childbirth, and death of the insured or their dependents. Conditions and treatments not covered by this insurance plan include orthodontic work, cosmetic surgery, vaccinations, abortions, injuries incurred while drunk or fighting, and treatment outside of Japan.

There is also a national health program for the Elderly. People over 70 qualify for this program, which is funded by contributions from the two main plans.

[That Guy]

Originally Posted by saden1

Iran isn't our allies

no shit sherlock. those are the enemies he rather talk to while bombing pakistan, and then later reneged on.

and Pakistan is a dictatorship we're prepping-up.

that's not a gross over generalization at all. musharaf is giving up his power, it's actually not a dictatorship, but i guess that meshes better with your simple me right you wrong view of the world.

Yes I like Obama but I have some misgivings as well. Him getting up there in front of AIPAC and pandering bothered me. One part of me thinks it's just politics, another see this as a sign of things to come. I'll admit that he is not perfect but when I look at McCain and Hillary he is certainly the "lesser of the three evils."

I'd also like to add that McCain has all the experience in the world but when you look at his overall policy I really wonder how he is any difference from Bush. If people are happy with Bush that's fine but don't tell me policy wise McCain is going to be better for America than Bush or has new ideas.

are you even paying any attention at all to politics? stuff like that really has me wondering. emissions cap and trade and health insurance are both shared issues with obama and a break from bush. nuclear, anti-pork, anti-farm subsidies, finance reform - all different than bush. admission that global warming exists - different than bush. better luck next time.

As for Japan's health care system, I couldn't find any information to support your claim. I did however find this and this. Sounds like a good universal health care system to me (control prices, allow flexibility and works for everyone).

you couldn't find anything to support my claim, and then you post an article re-stating the same thing i just said. amazing. and yeah, i said as far as socialized health care, japan's is the best, i'm glad you agreed while trying so hard to disagree.

jeez.

[saden1]

Originally Posted by That Guy

no shit sherlock. those are the enemies he rather talk to while bombing pakistan, and then later reneged on.

Perhaps you should re-read your post Mrs Popping? I'm not the one that posted the following and I will have you know I really did try to understand WTF you're trying to say.

talking to our enemies while bombing our allies (iran/pakistan) then later pulling back on talking to iran

Originally Posted by That Guy

that's not a gross over generalization at all. musharaf is giving up his power, it's actually not a dictatorship, but i guess that meshes better with your simple me right you wrong view of the world.

He's going to do it any day now, you just wait and see and we'll do everything it's power to bring democracy to Pakistan. Fair and free elections in Pakistan is just around the corner and Benazir Bhutto's son will lead Pakistan to the promise land.

Originally Posted by That Guy

are you even paying any attention at all to politics? stuff like that really has me wondering. emissions cap and trade and health insurance are both shared issues with obama and a break from bush. nuclear, anti-pork, anti-farm subsidies, finance reform - all different than bush. admission that global warming exists - different than bush. better luck next time.

Bush is anti-farm bill (only because we don't have the money to pay for it), for nuclear energy and McCain talks tough about the environment but policy wise it's without substance. His rhetoric certainly doesn't match his voting record or lack thereof. He did a pretty good job with respect to finance reform and he is different from Bush in that respect but lets not forget that this is the same guy that uses his wife's corporate jet to his advantage and exploits a legal loophole in the reform bill he co-sponsored.

Originally Posted by That Guy

you couldn't find anything to support my claim, and then you post an article re-stating the same thing i just said. amazing. and yeah, i said as far as socialized health care, japan's is the best, i'm glad you agreed while trying so hard to disagree.

jeez.

Jeez indeed...WTF are you talking about? Didn't you state the following? How exactly is your out-of-thin-air claim supported but the facts? As they say, you're entitled to your opinion but not to your own facts.

the japanese have a sorta decent idea (you pay 100% upfront, the gov pays you 80% back - so if you try to defraud them, you can get yourself royally screwed and it limits exposure to the million dollar a day cases)

[That Guy]

Originally Posted by saden1

Perhaps you should re-read your post Mrs Popping? I'm not the one that posted the following and I will have you know I really did try to understand WTF you're trying to say.

then you should learn to read, iran was the former, pakistan was the latter, it's really not that hard.

He's going to do it any day now, you just wait and see and we'll do everything it's power to bring democracy to Pakistan. Fair and free elections in Pakistan is just around the corner and Benazir Bhutto's son will lead Pakistan to the promise land.

you can be as childish as you like, but your speculation isn't any better than mine, and in light of that it'd probably be better to stick with the facts, but you seem opposed to that.

Bush is anti-farm bill (only because we don't have the money to pay for it), for nuclear energy and McCain talks tough about the environment but policy wise it's without substance. His rhetoric certainly doesn't match his voting record or lack thereof. He did a pretty good job with respect to finance reform and he is different from Bush in that respect but lets not forget that this is the same guy that uses his wife's corporate jet to his advantage and exploits a legal loophole in the reform bill he co-sponsored.

again, any proof against your opinions is written off. bush may be for nuclear, but is he going to get 30 reactors under construction before leaving office? mccain admits to global warming is far more than bush as done, and there are plenty of other instances (his voting record is only 85% with the GOP, obama votes on party lines 97% of the time, so much for change right?) but it's worthless wasting my time since you seem content on the "i'm right and your stupid routine," or else you might do a little research before making such blanket statements like you don't see how he's different without even bothering to look. emissions caps are different, health insurance credits are different (And again, obama is happy with both of those), yet you decide not to mention them at all.

Jeez indeed...WTF are you talking about? Didn't you state the following? How exactly is your out-of-thin-air claim supported but the facts? As they say, you're entitled to your opinion but not to your own facts.

you posted a f'ing article saying only 20% is consumer cost after i just said if you want socialized medicine japan is probably the closest and they pay 80% back, CAUSE I HAVE FRIENDS IN JAPAN, and they told me how it works there. i mean, do actually read the posts you're responding to?

if you can't be reasonable... i mean, you can ask for clarification without being an a-hole, and you can try using facts instead of opinions. i don't know why i'm even bothering to respond honestly, cause its obvious you're looking for excuses to say mccain is evil and can't seem to follow what's actually been said anyways.

[saden1]

Originally Posted by That Guy

then you should learn to read, iran was the former, pakistan was the latter, it's really not that hard.

you can be as childish as you like, but your speculation isn't any better than mine, and in light of that it'd probably be better to stick with the facts, but you seem opposed to that.

again, any proof against your opinions is written off. bush may be for nuclear, but is he going to get 30 reactors under construction before leaving office? mccain admits to global warming is far more than bush as done, and there are plenty of other instances (his voting record is only 85% with the GOP, obama votes on party lines 97% of the time, so much for change right?) but it's worthless wasting my time since you seem content on the "i'm right and your stupid routine," or else you might do a little research before making such blanket statements like you don't see how he's different without even bothering to look. emissions caps are different, health insurance credits are different (And again, obama is happy with both of those), yet you decide not to mention them at all.


you posted a f'ing article saying only 20% is consumer cost after i just said if you want socialized medicine japan is probably the closest and they pay 80% back, CAUSE I HAVE FRIENDS IN JAPAN, and they told me how it works there. i mean, do actually read the posts you're responding to?

if you can't be reasonable... i mean, you can ask for clarification without being an a-hole, and you can try using facts instead of opinions. i don't know why i'm even bothering to respond honestly, cause its obvious you're looking for excuses to say mccain is evil and can't seem to follow what's actually been said anyways.

I don't really care what you think of me but clearly you can't respond without getting angry and personal. I hope felt good getting it out of your system.

[Schneed10]

Originally Posted by saden1

Unless I am not privy to some information you are my understanding is that he is going to "jack up" the tax rate on the top 2% of income earners. These are the same people who hardly pay the same tax rate as middle class Americans.

As for his foreign policy statements, what exactly rubs you the wrong way? I mean, seriously, should we continue to plug a square peg in a round hole? Whatever we're currently doing isn't working so shouldn't we try something difference? Talking to people isn't naive, it's the most sensible thing to do. Even if you don't get anywhere by talking it doesn't mean you shouldn't try. "Bomb bomb bomb" doesn't work.

I don't get all the experience talk either. I mean, no one in their right mind hires someone based on experience alone. You can have all the experience in the world and still be a worthless POS. It's policy, policy, policy!

p.s. Greg Brown has experience...I would throw that mother f*cker under the bus, over the bridge, and if possible, in the lion's den at the zoo.

Whose political platform is "bomb bomb bomb?" McCain's? Bush's current record?

Nobody just "bomb bomb bombs", saden. It's that kind of uneducated generalization that makes me dismiss a lot of your political thoughts because you clearly don't have an understanding of the opposing party's political platform.

[SmootSmack]

Originally Posted by Schneed10

Whose political platform is "bomb bomb bomb?" McCain's? Bush's current record?

Nobody just "bomb bomb bombs", saden. It's that kind of uneducated generalization that makes me dismiss a lot of your political thoughts because you clearly don't have an understanding of the opposing party's political platform.

I think he's probably expounding on McCain's perhaps ill-timed joke of "Bomb, bomb, bomb Iran" to the tune of the Beach Boys' Barbara Ann

[saden1]

Originally Posted by Schneed10

Whose political platform is "bomb bomb bomb?" McCain's? Bush's current record?

Nobody just "bomb bomb bombs", saden. It's that kind of uneducated generalization that makes me dismiss a lot of your political thoughts because you clearly don't have an understanding of the opposing party's political platform.

Whose talking about the opposing party? "Bomb bomb bomb" is a direct McCain quote, a joke he made that was not funny. He's the one that say he won't sit down unless all our demands are met. It's not funny and it's not diplomacy. Same goes for Bush.

I will have you know I know fully well what the opposing party's platform is and I disagree pretty much with their oppressive platform. Hell, they don't even honor their platform. Dismiss all you want but hey man, you're entitled to your opinion and generalizations too (poor are poor because they want to be poor).

[Schneed10]

Originally Posted by saden1

Whose talking about the opposing party? "Bomb bomb bomb" is a direct McCain quote, a joke he made that was not funny. He's the one that say he won't sit down unless all our demands are met. It's not funny and it's not diplomacy. Same goes for Bush.

I will have you know I know fully well what the opposing party's platform is and I disagree pretty much with their oppressive platform. Hell, they don't even honor their platform. Dismiss all you want but hey man, you're entitled to your opinion and generalizations too (poor are poor because they want to be poor).

I never said those words. Go back and read my posts.

I've said I'm all for helping people out who are down on their luck, such as someone who has lost a job or a single mom who lost her husband to an auto accident. But I don't like the idea of helping people who simply make poor decisions.

[saden1]

Originally Posted by Schneed10

I never said those words. Go back and read my posts.

I've said I'm all for helping people out who are down on their luck, such as someone who has lost a job or a single mom who lost her husband to an auto accident. But I don't like the idea of helping people who simply make poor decisions.

Apologies. I hear that train of thought so often I assumed that's what you were implying.