Ron Paul 2012?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
08-03-2012, 03:51 PM
RE: Ron Paul 2012?
(08-03-2012 02:03 PM)germanyt Wrote:  
(08-03-2012 12:56 PM)GirlyMan Wrote:  
(08-03-2012 09:47 AM)germanyt Wrote:  I absolutely understand them. But if a person making 1 million is paying 45% on everything from 250K to 1M then he's taking home 662500 before his taxes on the first 250K are taken out.

Let's look at it from a different perspective. To simplify things let's assume we only have 2 tax brackets, 35% for AGI <=$250K, 40% for AGI >$250K. So the guy making $350K incurs an additional $5K tax burden. Big fuckin' deal, not like he can't afford it unless he don't know how to manage his finances in the first place. That $5K don't mean near as much to him as somebody making $35K. And that's the decreasing marginal utility of money.

(08-03-2012 09:47 AM)germanyt Wrote:  As for marginal utility. Are you suggesting that is a reason people shouldn't want more money?

Nah, I don't give a shit if people want more money or not, much like I don't give a shit if KC is a Calvinist or not. No skin off my scrotum. ....

Who are you to decide what another person finds adequate? 'Enough' money is entirely subjective.

I ain't assuming your responsibilities, brother. That call is entirely up to you.

As it was in the beginning is now and ever shall be, world without end. Amen.
And I will show you something different from either
Your shadow at morning striding behind you
Or your shadow at evening rising to meet you;
I will show you fear in a handful of dust.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
08-03-2012, 03:52 PM
RE: Ron Paul 2012?




2:30
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
08-03-2012, 03:57 PM
RE: Ron Paul 2012?
(08-03-2012 03:51 PM)GirlyMan Wrote:  
(08-03-2012 02:03 PM)germanyt Wrote:  
(08-03-2012 12:56 PM)GirlyMan Wrote:  
(08-03-2012 09:47 AM)germanyt Wrote:  I absolutely understand them. But if a person making 1 million is paying 45% on everything from 250K to 1M then he's taking home 662500 before his taxes on the first 250K are taken out.

Let's look at it from a different perspective. To simplify things let's assume we only have 2 tax brackets, 35% for AGI <=$250K, 40% for AGI >$250K. So the guy making $350K incurs an additional $5K tax burden. Big fuckin' deal, not like he can't afford it unless he don't know how to manage his finances in the first place. That $5K don't mean near as much to him as somebody making $35K. And that's the decreasing marginal utility of money.

(08-03-2012 09:47 AM)germanyt Wrote:  As for marginal utility. Are you suggesting that is a reason people shouldn't want more money?

Nah, I don't give a shit if people want more money or not, much like I don't give a shit if KC is a Calvinist or not. No skin off my scrotum. ....

Who are you to decide what another person finds adequate? 'Enough' money is entirely subjective.

I ain't assuming your responsibilities, brother. That call is entirely up to you.

sarcasm?

If so, I'd like to point out that I'm supporting smaller government and less taxes for all. Not to decide what is and isn't a fair tax rate for the rich. Lower is better in all cases. We need a mutually agreeable progressive tax rate that is fair to both sides and supports a very small government. And if Ron Paul can manage to reduce goverment costs to the point where we no longer need income taxes then so be it.

But I'd be willing to be that even if government ran deficit neutral without a single taxpayer dollar liberals would still be complaining about how it's not fair how much the rich have. Which would prove the point of entitlement mentalities and class warfare and not at all about how they 'use more from society and should pay more'.

“Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it's time to pause and reflect.”

-Mark Twain
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
08-03-2012, 04:12 PM (This post was last modified: 08-03-2012 04:28 PM by mysticjbyrd.)
RE: Ron Paul 2012?
These are what are called facts, not lolz cuba. Do you even know if cuba's satisfaction rating is lower than ours? I couldn't find that particular stat.

Fact: The U.S. has among the worst health statistics of all rich nations.

Health Care Expenditures (percent of GDP) (1)

United States 13.4%
Canada 10.0
Finland 9.1
Sweden 8.6
Germany 8.4
Netherlands 8.4
Norway 7.6
Japan 6.8
United Kingdom 6.6
Denmark 6.5

Doctors' incomes: (2)

United States $132,300
Germany 91,244
Denmark 50,585
Finland 42,943
Norway 35,356
Sweden 25,768

Percent of population covered by public health care:

ALL NATIONS (except below) 100%
France, Austria 99
Switzerland, Spain, Belgium 98
Germany 92
Netherlands 77
United States 40

Average paid maternity leave (as of 1991; this changed with Clinton's
signing of the 1993 Family and Medical Leave Act):

Sweden 32 weeks
France 28
United Kingdom 18
Norway 18
Denmark 18
Japan 14
Germany 14
Netherlands 12
United States 0

Life Expectancy (years):

Men Women
Japan 76.2 82.5
France 72.9 81.3
Switzerland 74.1 81.3
Netherlands 73.7 80.5
Sweden 74.2 80.4
Canada 73.4 80.3
Norway 73.1 79.7
Germany 72.6 79.2
Finland 70.7 78.8
United States 71.6 78.6
United Kingdom 72.7 78.2
Denmark 72.2 77.9

Infant Mortality Rate (per 1,000 live births):

United States 10.4
United Kingdom 9.4
Germany 8.5
Denmark 8.1
Canada 7.9
Norway 7.9
Netherlands 7.8
Switzerland 6.8
Finland 5.9
Sweden 5.9
Japan 5.0

Death rate of 1-to-4 year olds (per community of 200,000 per year):

United States 101.5
Japan 92.2
Norway 90.2
Denmark 85.1
France 84.9
United Kingdom 82.2
Canada 82.1
Netherlands 80.3
Germany 77.6
Switzerland 72.5
Sweden 64.7
Finland 53.3

Death rate of 15-to-24 year olds (per community of 200,000 per year):

United States 203
Switzerland 175
Canada 161
France 156
Finland 154
Norway 128
Germany 122
Denmark 120
United Kingdom 114
Sweden 109
Japan 96
Netherlands 90

Note: the murder rate for the above age group is 48.8 per 200,000. Even
subtracting this entirely still puts the U.S. near the top of the list.

Premature Death (years of life lost before the age of 64 per 100 people):

United States 5.8 years
Denmark 4.9
Finland 4.8
Canada 4.5
Germany 4.5
United Kingdom 4.4
Norway 4.3
Switzerland 4.1
Netherlands 4.0
Sweden 3.8
Japan 3.3

Percent of people with normal body mass:

Men Women
Germany 53% 37
Finland 51 37
United Kingdom 46 38
Canada 52 29
Switzerland 49 30
France 44 30
Denmark 44 25
United States 47 22
Sweden 44 25

Percent of people who believe their health care system needs fundamental change:

United States 60%
Sweden 58
United Kingdom 52
Japan 47
Netherlands 46
France 42
Canada 38


http://tinypic.com/r/9090so/5
http://tinypic.com/r/veb3ow/5
http://tinypic.com/r/wbqko7/5
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
08-03-2012, 04:23 PM (This post was last modified: 08-03-2012 04:26 PM by GirlyMan.)
RE: Ron Paul 2012?
(08-03-2012 03:57 PM)germanyt Wrote:  
(08-03-2012 03:51 PM)GirlyMan Wrote:  I ain't assuming your responsibilities, brother. That call is entirely up to you.

sarcasm?

Nope. That's pretty much as sincere and genuine as I can be.

As it was in the beginning is now and ever shall be, world without end. Amen.
And I will show you something different from either
Your shadow at morning striding behind you
Or your shadow at evening rising to meet you;
I will show you fear in a handful of dust.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
08-03-2012, 04:37 PM (This post was last modified: 08-03-2012 04:45 PM by germanyt.)
RE: Ron Paul 2012?
(08-03-2012 04:12 PM)mysticjbyrd Wrote:  These are what are called facts, not lolz cuba. Do you even know if cuba's satisfaction rating is lower than ours? I couldn't find that particular stat.

Health Care Expenditures (percent of GDP) (1)

United States 13.4%
Canada 10.0
Finland 9.1
Sweden 8.6
Germany 8.4
Netherlands 8.4
Norway 7.6
Japan 6.8
United Kingdom 6.6
Denmark 6.5

Doctors' incomes: (2)

United States $132,300
Germany 91,244
Denmark 50,585
Finland 42,943
Norway 35,356
Sweden 25,768

Percent of population covered by public health care:

ALL NATIONS (except below) 100%
France, Austria 99
Switzerland, Spain, Belgium 98
Germany 92
Netherlands 77
United States 40

Average paid maternity leave (as of 1991; this changed with Clinton's
signing of the 1993 Family and Medical Leave Act):

Sweden 32 weeks
France 28
United Kingdom 18
Norway 18
Denmark 18
Japan 14
Germany 14
Netherlands 12
United States 0

Life Expectancy (years):

Men Women
Japan 76.2 82.5
France 72.9 81.3
Switzerland 74.1 81.3
Netherlands 73.7 80.5
Sweden 74.2 80.4
Canada 73.4 80.3
Norway 73.1 79.7
Germany 72.6 79.2
Finland 70.7 78.8
United States 71.6 78.6
United Kingdom 72.7 78.2
Denmark 72.2 77.9

Infant Mortality Rate (per 1,000 live births):

United States 10.4
United Kingdom 9.4
Germany 8.5
Denmark 8.1
Canada 7.9
Norway 7.9
Netherlands 7.8
Switzerland 6.8
Finland 5.9
Sweden 5.9
Japan 5.0

Death rate of 1-to-4 year olds (per community of 200,000 per year):

United States 101.5
Japan 92.2
Norway 90.2
Denmark 85.1
France 84.9
United Kingdom 82.2
Canada 82.1
Netherlands 80.3
Germany 77.6
Switzerland 72.5
Sweden 64.7
Finland 53.3

Death rate of 15-to-24 year olds (per community of 200,000 per year):

United States 203
Switzerland 175
Canada 161
France 156
Finland 154
Norway 128
Germany 122
Denmark 120
United Kingdom 114
Sweden 109
Japan 96
Netherlands 90

Note: the murder rate for the above age group is 48.8 per 200,000. Even
subtracting this entirely still puts the U.S. near the top of the list.

Premature Death (years of life lost before the age of 64 per 100 people):

United States 5.8 years
Denmark 4.9
Finland 4.8
Canada 4.5
Germany 4.5
United Kingdom 4.4
Norway 4.3
Switzerland 4.1
Netherlands 4.0
Sweden 3.8
Japan 3.3

Percent of people with normal body mass:

Men Women
Germany 53% 37
Finland 51 37
United Kingdom 46 38
Canada 52 29
Switzerland 49 30
France 44 30
Denmark 44 25
United States 47 22
Sweden 44 25

Percent of people who believe their health care system needs fundamental change:

United States 60%
Sweden 58
United Kingdom 52
Japan 47
Netherlands 46
France 42
Canada 38


http://tinypic.com/r/9090so/5
http://tinypic.com/r/veb3ow/5
http://tinypic.com/r/wbqko7/5

Those numbers dont' prove anything. I could simply assume that the nation's ridiculous obesity problem accounts for all of it. Or our alcohol and tobacco problems cause it. And the fact that socialist democracies with universal health care show less desire to change could just be apathy. Similarly to how opposition to Obamacare is lower now than it was when it was enacted even though it's expaded health care to no one and costs have gone up. It's because people forget about shit.



http://cnsnews.com/news/article/30-perce...-obamacare
http://news.investors.com/article/603121...spiral.htm
http://www.forbes.com/sites/sallypipes/2...obamacare/



And who cares about Cuba's satisfaction rate? Again, apathy. When was the last medical breakthrough to come out of Cuba? When was the last time an insured American went to Cuba to have a procedure done because they felt the care was better?

“Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it's time to pause and reflect.”

-Mark Twain
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
08-03-2012, 06:13 PM (This post was last modified: 08-03-2012 06:25 PM by mysticjbyrd.)
RE: Ron Paul 2012?
You should work for faux news. Despite a list of facts, meh...those #s don't mean shit!!! I could just assume that there is some other imaginary factors that cause this health care to be shit... Ohh I mean the best health care in the world.

Back that shit up then...I already disproved it despite the burden of proof being on you. So go ahead, show me all that amazing data.

PS: Those links are as usual a pile of shit. Each one of them says obamacare FFS! Whatever small amount of credibility they had was instantly lost with that word, and thats not even what we are talking about anyways.

Of course I am willing to bet you have no data to back anything up. Didn't have any counterpoints to Ron pauls policies, didnt have anything to backup global warming, so why would this be different. I am willing to bet $1000 that you only believe the anti-global warming propaganda because of Ron Paul & the Republican party fed it to you.

(08-03-2012 03:57 PM)germanyt Wrote:  If so, I'd like to point out that I'm supporting smaller government and less taxes for all. Not to decide what is and isn't a fair tax rate for the rich. Lower is better in all cases. We need a mutually agreeable progressive tax rate that is fair to both sides and supports a very small government. And if Ron Paul can manage to reduce goverment costs to the point where we no longer need income taxes then so be it.

Every single Republican says that same shit. Hey guys lets drastically lower taxes!!! Never mind the fact it will lower our net income, forget that shit! We will just cut tons of shit, and then somehow come up with a plus.

What are you going to cut? Hmmm....Dont worry about that. Them damn gays are having sex!!! And now they want to get married. That shit is gross!

Except they never want to cut anything....its a propaganda lie they feed to gullible idiots. They have no intention of cutting spending, not really anyways, they just want to cut taxes on the rich. Thats all they care about...
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
08-03-2012, 10:12 PM
RE: Ron Paul 2012?
I like Ron Paul a some issues, mostly foreign policy and the drug war. I wish Gary Johnson had gotten farther in the GOP race but was never really given a chance. Of course they're a lot of areas where Ron Paul shows he much like the rest of main stream GOP in wishing to control peoples private lives. As to those who say they don't vote, you have nothing to complain about if you don't want to participate in the system. We have the greatest governmental system in the world, it's nowhere near perfect but it is the greatest system to allow the expression of liberty and democratic principals in the world. [/align]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-03-2012, 12:39 AM
RE: Ron Paul 2012?
republicans dont cut shit and they never will. they are the cut tax, borrow , and spend party. did you know fake reagan spent more money in his 8 years than any president in history before him. he increased the national debt for 8 years straight. republicans seem to do a better job balancing budgets at the state level than democrats. romney left Mass with a surplus and pete wilson of cali left a 10 billion surplus. something happens when they go to washington and become a senator or president. they spend like dems
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-03-2012, 05:19 AM
RE: Ron Paul 2012?
(07-03-2012 09:50 AM)mysticjbyrd Wrote:  
(07-03-2012 07:28 AM)houseofcantor Wrote:  Neither of ya know nothing. Big Grin

I'm thinking Paul 'cause I'm thinking the Fed sux. He makes the right kinda noises; but they're all criminals. Tongue

Lets assume that is true, and also assume he could get rid of it That's still like firing a gun in your mouth to remove a sore tooth. Forget the one thing he MIGHT be able to fix, look at how much he could screw up. No thank you.

Are you guys sure that Rich Santorum is the crazy one of the bunch?

I'm sure Paul is crazy, but so what? Tongue

Santorum is a monkey; seems like he's just there to make noise.

[Image: klingon_zps7e68578a.jpg]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: