Join Our Green Bay Packers Interactive Community!

We have been providing fans with the best source of Packers information since 2006!
Your participation is greatly anticipated!
Login or Register.
3 Pages<123>
Options
View
Go to last post Go to first unread
Offline DakotaT  
#16 Posted : Sunday, January 6, 2013 4:44:18 PM(UTC)
DakotaT

Rank: Super Bowl MVP

Joined: 8/18/2008(UTC)

Applause Given: 658
Applause Received: 1,347

Originally Posted by: dfosterf Go to Quoted Post
I missed nothing. You remain a complete commie bitch stuffed-full of bullsh*t and MSNBC delusions and I gotta go back to work in a few days for another 6 in a row after a very rare 3 day off period.

While retired.

Not because of politics, the gov't, or the economy...

...Because of my bossy wife, lol



Oh yeah, you have it rough! Boo hoo! Dumb bastard.
I sure miss that rolls eyes smiley.
UserPostedImage
Offline dfosterf  
#17 Posted : Sunday, January 6, 2013 7:43:33 PM(UTC)
dfosterf

Rank: Super Bowl MVP

United States
Joined: 8/19/2008(UTC)

Applause Given: 187
Applause Received: 410

Originally Posted by: DakotaT Go to Quoted Post
Oh yeah, you have it rough! Boo hoo! Dumb bastard.
I sure miss that rolls eyes smiley.


I had it plenty rough, bitch. I wasn't in the mother- friggin' Air Force, ya know. (Not that there is anything wrong with that Smile )

e.g.

Just one of my semi-interesting days would be an absolute complete horror to haunt the lifetimes of a platoon of tough folks like you that did not know how evil we humans can be.

I earned my pay.

Edited by user Sunday, January 6, 2013 8:05:11 PM(UTC)  | Reason: Not specified

UserPostedImage
damn skippy I'm an owner. I currently own a full .00001924537805515393 % of the Green Bay Packers.



Offline DakotaT  
#18 Posted : Sunday, January 6, 2013 8:11:00 PM(UTC)
DakotaT

Rank: Super Bowl MVP

Joined: 8/18/2008(UTC)

Applause Given: 658
Applause Received: 1,347

Originally Posted by: dfosterf Go to Quoted Post
I had it plenty rough, bitch. I wasn't in the mother- friggin' Air Force, ya know. (Not that there is anything wrong with that Smile )

e.g.

Just one of my semi-interesting days would be an absolute complete horror to haunt the lifetimes of a platoon of tough folks like you that did not know how evil we humans can be.

I earned my pay.


I didn't say you had it rough sarcastically, I said you have it rough sarcasitcally. Enjoy your pension paid for by GenX.
UserPostedImage
Offline dfosterf  
#19 Posted : Sunday, January 6, 2013 8:15:05 PM(UTC)
dfosterf

Rank: Super Bowl MVP

United States
Joined: 8/19/2008(UTC)

Applause Given: 187
Applause Received: 410

thanks, sorry. I told you a war story. In honor of my friend Nick.

Edited by user Sunday, January 6, 2013 11:11:50 PM(UTC)  | Reason: Not specified

UserPostedImage
damn skippy I'm an owner. I currently own a full .00001924537805515393 % of the Green Bay Packers.



thanks Post received 1 applause.
zombieslayer on 1/6/2013(UTC)
Offline Cheesey  
#20 Posted : Monday, January 7, 2013 5:21:55 PM(UTC)
Cheesey

Rank: Most Valuable Player

Joined: 7/28/2008(UTC)

Applause Given: 177
Applause Received: 396

"Redistribution of wealth" won't do a damn thing. It will just give more money to the government to piss away.
If they can't be trusted to "live within their means" now, what makes you think that giving them trillions more will make them be better at money matters?
The debt will keep growing, and sooner or later we will end up like Greece if they don't learn how to NOT piss away what they take in already.
UserPostedImage
Offline DakotaT  
#21 Posted : Monday, January 7, 2013 5:38:04 PM(UTC)
DakotaT

Rank: Super Bowl MVP

Joined: 8/18/2008(UTC)

Applause Given: 658
Applause Received: 1,347

Originally Posted by: Cheesey Go to Quoted Post
"Redistribution of wealth" won't do a damn thing. It will just give more money to the government to piss away.
If they can't be trusted to "live within their means" now, what makes you think that giving them trillions more will make them be better at money matters?
The debt will keep growing, and sooner or later we will end up like Greece if they don't learn how to NOT piss away what they take in already.


Funny, redistribution of wealth is just fine when we fight unnecessary wars to line the pockets of the wealthy stockholders of Haliburton, off the backs of the taxpayer.

The right wing can shove that redistribution sh*t up their ass, Cheesey! Tax the sh*t out of those wealthy pricks - they are still paying less here than they would anywhere else in the world.

As for cutting spending, I'm all for it - just so long as it's the military and not domestic social problems.
UserPostedImage
Offline Formo  
#22 Posted : Monday, January 7, 2013 8:39:45 PM(UTC)
Formo

Rank: All Pro

Joined: 8/12/2008(UTC)

Applause Given: 215
Applause Received: 152

Originally Posted by: DakotaT Go to Quoted Post
Funny, redistribution of wealth is just fine when we fight unnecessary wars to line the pockets of the wealthy stockholders of Haliburton, off the backs of the taxpayer.

The right wing can shove that redistribution sh*t up their ass, Cheesey! Tax the sh*t out of those wealthy pricks - they are still paying less here than they would anywhere else in the world.

As for cutting spending, I'm all for it - just so long as it's the military and not domestic social problems.


If we cut the spending on the military war machine (which helps funds all our enemies' militaries as well), we wouldn't have to redistribute the wealth. And the already over-taxed wealthy could be able to give MORE.

Oh yeah, and we wouldn't have to worry about taking away their incentive to continue their wealth.
UserPostedImage
Thanks to TheViking88 for the sig!!
thanks Post received 1 applause.
Wade on 1/8/2013(UTC)
Offline Wade  
#23 Posted : Tuesday, January 8, 2013 6:14:15 AM(UTC)
Wade

Rank: All Pro

Joined: 8/1/2009(UTC)
Location: nowhere of importance

Applause Given: 674
Applause Received: 688

Originally Posted by: Formo Go to Quoted Post
If we cut the spending on the military war machine (which helps funds all our enemies' militaries as well), we wouldn't have to redistribute the wealth. And the already over-taxed wealthy could be able to give MORE.

Oh yeah, and we wouldn't have to worry about taking away their incentive to continue their wealth.


The key word being "if", of course. Problem is, where do the cuts come? How much you want to bet it won't come among the general officers or the big money contracts and the influencers? Any more than the cuts to "social programs" will come from the administrators and the pet charities that suck off the government tit.

Next time you hear someone up the government/bureaucratic hierarchies, civilian or military, complaining about how terrible budget cuts are, look carefully at their department/agency. Look where the cuts are made (from the low tier employees and from the most deserving of the beneficiaries), and look where the cuts are not made (e.g., from the guys at the top and from the useless dead weight in the agency). In fact they'll often end up hiring/promoting that deadweight "in order to administer the growing needs imposed by the cuts forced on us."

Bah.


And do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind, that you may prove what is that good and acceptable and perfect will of God.
Romans 12:2 (NKJV)
Offline Wade  
#24 Posted : Tuesday, January 8, 2013 6:15:51 AM(UTC)
Wade

Rank: All Pro

Joined: 8/1/2009(UTC)
Location: nowhere of importance

Applause Given: 674
Applause Received: 688

Originally Posted by: DakotaT Go to Quoted Post
Funny, redistribution of wealth is just fine when we fight unnecessary wars to line the pockets of the wealthy stockholders of Haliburton, off the backs of the taxpayer.

The right wing can shove that redistribution sh*t up their ass, Cheesey! Tax the sh*t out of those wealthy pricks - they are still paying less here than they would anywhere else in the world.

As for cutting spending, I'm all for it - just so long as it's the military and not domestic social problems.


And part of the reason America has been more productive than the rest of the world is that they've paid less taxes than anywhere else in the world.

And do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind, that you may prove what is that good and acceptable and perfect will of God.
Romans 12:2 (NKJV)
Offline Wade  
#25 Posted : Tuesday, January 8, 2013 6:16:49 AM(UTC)
Wade

Rank: All Pro

Joined: 8/1/2009(UTC)
Location: nowhere of importance

Applause Given: 674
Applause Received: 688

p.s., DakotaT. I'm still waiting for your quantitative evidence.

Big Grin
And do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind, that you may prove what is that good and acceptable and perfect will of God.
Romans 12:2 (NKJV)
Offline DakotaT  
#26 Posted : Tuesday, January 8, 2013 7:46:16 AM(UTC)
DakotaT

Rank: Super Bowl MVP

Joined: 8/18/2008(UTC)

Applause Given: 658
Applause Received: 1,347

Originally Posted by: Wade Go to Quoted Post
And part of the reason America has been more productive than the rest of the world is that they've paid less taxes than anywhere else in the world.



America, and every other empire throughout history, built their wealth by the exploitation of the poor and through slavery. We like to say that we have these laws in place to protect workers, but then you get a bunch of like minded rich guys, banded together by wealth, to systematically destroy what gains men and women accomplished. To pour more salt in the wound - they come up with a political party that weak minded poor people can relate to and pit the poor against the poor.

Sorry boys, I'm not going to shed one tear for the wealthy that have to pay more taxes. They've taken advantage of the tax system for so long, it's time for them to step up. Robinhood is much greater than Romneyhood.
UserPostedImage
Offline DakotaT  
#27 Posted : Tuesday, January 8, 2013 7:52:20 AM(UTC)
DakotaT

Rank: Super Bowl MVP

Joined: 8/18/2008(UTC)

Applause Given: 658
Applause Received: 1,347

Originally Posted by: Wade Go to Quoted Post
p.s., DakotaT. I'm still waiting for your quantitative evidence.

Big Grin


Go take a Jack Kerouac trip and give me some quantitative evidence of your own. I don't have any time. 30 years of trickle down is pretty evident throughout the slums of our country.
UserPostedImage
Offline Wade  
#28 Posted : Tuesday, January 8, 2013 10:52:53 AM(UTC)
Wade

Rank: All Pro

Joined: 8/1/2009(UTC)
Location: nowhere of importance

Applause Given: 674
Applause Received: 688

Originally Posted by: DakotaT Go to Quoted Post
Go take a Jack Kerouac trip and give me some quantitative evidence of your own. I don't have any time. 30 years of trickle down is pretty evident throughout the slums of our country.



You want to take trillions of dollars away from people (because, remember, the problem here is in the trillions, not just a few tens of billions), and you don't think it is necessary to have quantitative evidence first?

Seriously? SERIOUSLY?? When it comes to that liberal babble, you truly are an overly trusting soul.

Here's a bit of quantitative thinking for you:

I. Solving problems by taking from the rich.

1. How many billionaires are there in the United States?

2. How many billionaires would it take to make a trillionaire?

Answer to #2: 1000.
Answer to #1: 425 (per wikipedia)
So if you took ALL the wealth of the billionaires in America, you'd eliminate about ONE year of the deficit run by the Obama administration.

Source: Wikipedia.

II. How many people are "rich" in America vs. the rest of the world:

USA: 5.1 million households with a $1 million net worth (1.6% of population of 312 million).
Japan: 1.6 million households with a $1 million net worth (1.25% of 128 million)
China: 1.4 million households with a $1 million NW (0.1% of population of 1,344 million).

USA: households with a $100 million net worth: 2989.

Percentage-wise, a bigger proportion of our population is wealthier. Why is that, I wonder?

Sources: http://business.time.com...es-but-spikes-worldwide; www.google.com/publicdata.


III. Thirty years of trickle down.

Comparing 1981 and 2011:
Personal income per person (in 2005 dollars): $19,100 in 1981, $37,000 in 2011 [increased by 94%]

Prices of particular goods/services people buy with their income (all expressed as a percent of 2005 dollars)

Durable goods (cars, furniture, recreational goods): 1981: 99% 2011: 91%. [8% cheaper]
Nondurable goods (food, clothing, gasoline, energy): 1981: 61% 2011: 119% [58% more expensive]
Services (housing, health care, financial services and insurance): 1981: 41% 2011: 117% [76% more expensive]

So, we're spending a lot more for services (e.g. health care), and quite a bit more for food and gasoline [when you separate things out, clothing is actually a bit cheaper]. And we're paying less for goods that last for awhile (furniture and the stuff in our garage and back yard).

And even the amount we've been spending for services, food, and gas? It has increased LESS than our income.


Sources: www.bea.gov (Tables 2.1, 2.3.4)

IV. The slums.

People in poverty:
1980 225,000
2002 285,000
Increase: 26.7%
Population increase over same period: (227 million to 287 million): 26.4%.

Percent of population in poverty, 1980: about 1/10th of 1 percent.
Percent of population in poverty, 2002: about 1/10th of 1 percent.


Poverty threshold 1980 (family of four): 6,628
Poverty threshold 2002 (family of four): 14,480
Increase: 118% [= change in CPI]
Increase in real GDP over same period: 45%


Sources: http://www.census.gov/hh...ta/historical/rdp05.html
http://www.census.gov/hh...a/threshld/thresh80.html
http://www.census.gov/hh...a/threshld/thresh02.html


V. Government "help" and taxation.

(This is from the Bureau of Economic Analysis, too, Table 2.9, which only goes back to 1992; I'm pretty sure these are not adjusted for inflation, but that doesn't matter for what I want to point out here.)

1. Personal income (total, not per capita): From $5,300 billion to $12,900 billion [increased by 143%].
2. Government social benefits to persons (Social security, medicare, medicaid, unemployment insurance, vet benefits): From $300 billion to $2,300 billion [increased by 666%; these are pure transfer payments, i.e. "redistribution"]
3. Contributions to government social insurance (what we pay for social security, medicare): From $200 billion to $900 billion [increased by 350%]
4. Personal taxes: from $350 billion to $1,400 billion [increased by 300%].

So, while increased productivity means our incomes have increased by 150% in the last thirty years, the tax burden we have has increased by three times that and our other "voluntary contributions" by 3.5 times, just so government can help us to shift money from one pocket to another 6 or 7 times?

And with that evidence -- not just pontificating and arm-waving, but evidence -- you really think ANY solution to ANY multi-trillion dollar problem is going to come through ANY government action?

It's an amazing thing about numbers. Start looking at them carefully, and you realize that the sampling process offered by your own eyes turns out to needs to be taken with a very large grain of salt.

Eyewitness evidence, contrary to the TV detective shows, is often the *WORST* evidence. And often the worst eyewitness evidence of all is our own. And this is especially the case when we use our personal experience and observation to draw conclusions about how economies and other "systems" made up of hundreds of millions of pieces or more.

I'm sorry, my friend, but if we don't have time to think seriously about the numbers, we every damn last thing the government does to you in the years ahead.

Paying attention to numbers will set us free.
And do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind, that you may prove what is that good and acceptable and perfect will of God.
Romans 12:2 (NKJV)
Offline Formo  
#29 Posted : Tuesday, January 8, 2013 11:04:21 AM(UTC)
Formo

Rank: All Pro

Joined: 8/12/2008(UTC)

Applause Given: 215
Applause Received: 152

lol Virtual beat down!!
UserPostedImage
Thanks to TheViking88 for the sig!!
Offline DakotaT  
#30 Posted : Tuesday, January 8, 2013 2:02:40 PM(UTC)
DakotaT

Rank: Super Bowl MVP

Joined: 8/18/2008(UTC)

Applause Given: 658
Applause Received: 1,347

Originally Posted by: Formo Go to Quoted Post
lol Virtual beat down!!


What are you laughing at tard? What have you ever contributed to this conversation besides the Tea view?
UserPostedImage
 
Users browsing this topic
Guest
3 Pages<123>
Forum Jump  
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.

Powered by YAF.NET | YAF.NET © 2003-2014, Yet Another Forum.NET
This page was generated in 0.337 seconds.

Notification

Icon
Error

Tweeter

Recent Topics
23m / Random Babble / wpr

54m / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

2h / Green Bay Packers Talk / steveishere

3h / Green Bay Packers Talk / TheKanataThrilla

7h / Green Bay Packers Talk / hardrocker950

8h / Green Bay Packers Talk / uffda udfa

9h / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

10h / Green Bay Packers Talk / DarkaneRules

11h / Fantasy Sports Talk / Smokey

13h / Fantasy Sports Talk / Smokey

14h / Green Bay Packers Talk / porky88

15h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Smokey

15h / Green Bay Packers Talk / DakotaT

17h / Around The NFL / wpr

17h / Green Bay Packers Talk / steveishere


Copyright © 2006-2014 PackersHome.com™. All Rights Reserved.