Balta1701 Posted October 19, 2011 Share Posted October 19, 2011 There are plenty of fact-checkers around, and I don’t really consider it part of my job here to think about where candidates messed up, especially since a lot of their factually incorrect statements are just playing to their audience, and you sort of have to expect a lot of that. But Anderson Cooper, the CNN moderator, has no excuse: his claim that 47% of American pay no taxes was inexcusable. Just terrible. The correct stat is that 47% of US households don’t pay federal income taxes, which is very different. It’s bad when politicians get basic factual stuff wrong; it’s terrible when CNN does. To me at least, the debate had a clear loser, and it was Anderson Cooper and CNN for that question. Link Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted October 20, 2011 Share Posted October 20, 2011 By the way, the world ends Friday, again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted October 21, 2011 Share Posted October 21, 2011 Great graph demonstrating why the "47% of Americans pay no income taxes" is such a misleading point...because that group still pays payroll taxes...and look what has happened with payroll taxes as a share of revenue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HuskyCaucasian Posted October 21, 2011 Share Posted October 21, 2011 QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Oct 17, 2011 -> 03:52 PM) Pew research damn liberal media being soft a democrat... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StrangeSox Posted October 23, 2011 Share Posted October 23, 2011 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kapkomet Posted October 23, 2011 Share Posted October 23, 2011 QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Oct 21, 2011 -> 09:14 AM) Great graph demonstrating why the "47% of Americans pay no income taxes" is such a misleading point...because that group still pays payroll taxes...and look what has happened with payroll taxes as a share of revenue. This is a misleading chart anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StrangeSox Posted October 23, 2011 Share Posted October 23, 2011 Why? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kapkomet Posted October 23, 2011 Share Posted October 23, 2011 I'll answer the question with a question. What could cause, for example, a decrease in corporate tax rates, despite the rise in the rates themselves? This is something that most GOP folks get wrong, IMO. They scream tax cuts (and so do I) but you have to do it right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StrangeSox Posted October 23, 2011 Share Posted October 23, 2011 I don't understand your question. Do you mean a decrease in corporate tax revenues, or revenues-as-a-percentage-of-all-tax-revenues? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted October 23, 2011 Share Posted October 23, 2011 A decrease in the fraction of wealth going to corporate earnings would produce a decrease in total corporate tax collections...but of course, the exact opposite has happened. The thing that would cause a decrease in corporate tax collections is exemptions of course....which is another problem with the current system buried in that graph...the fact that a strong lobbyist can get exemptions or credits for just about anything stuck into the tax code. (#occupy). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kapkomet Posted October 24, 2011 Share Posted October 24, 2011 Your reality is a little bit jaded. If there were as many exemptions as you think there are, then all these "evil corporations" wouldn't offshore, now would they? You can't have it both ways. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted October 24, 2011 Share Posted October 24, 2011 QUOTE (kapkomet @ Oct 23, 2011 -> 08:45 PM) Your reality is a little bit jaded. If there were as many exemptions as you think there are, then all these "evil corporations" wouldn't offshore, now would they? You can't have it both ways. Yes they would...if they believed that by moving stuff offshore they could convince naive legislators and conservatives to support even lower tax rates. Like, for example, they might convince GWB to support a 1 time "onshoring funds tax holiday". Then following that up by massively increasing the amount of money kept overseas, so that 5 years later you could come back and insist on another "1 time onshoring tax holidary". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted October 24, 2011 Share Posted October 24, 2011 Somehow, this is the fault of a union. Occupy Maine protesters say Sunday morning's attack with a chemical explosive has left them with a mixture of anxiety and resolve. "We are more motivated to keep doing what we're doing," said Stephanie Wilburn, of Portland, who was sitting near where the chemical mixture in a Gatorade bottle was tossed at 4 a.m. Sunday. "They have heard us and we're making a difference." Wilburn said she was startled and briefly lost hearing in her left ear when the device exploded beneath a table about 10 feet away. Wilburn's hearing returned and police said no injuries were reported. Portland police Sgt. Glen McGary said the bomb was thrown into the camp’s kitchen, a tarped area where food is cooked and served. Protest organizers said the explosion lifted a large table about a foot off the ground. "There was no fire . . . We had a good 20 feet of thick smoke rolling out from under the table," Wilburn said. They could see the "G" on the 24-ounce bottle and its orange cap, as well as bits of silver metal, she said. She and a friend who ran over to look at it breathed in fumes that smelled like ammonia, she said. Witnesses said a silver car had been circling before the attack, its occupants shouting things like "Get a job" and "You communist." They believe someone from that car threw the device, according to a statement from Occupy Maine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted October 24, 2011 Share Posted October 24, 2011 Maybe this guy paid a visit? http://www.theblaze.com/stories/occupy-day...g-f-the-police/ Last week it was protesters at Occupy Portland singing “F*** the U.S.A.,” this week it’s an Occupy Dayton protester declaring, “F*** the military, f*** your flag, f*** the police.” An unidentified protester in Dayton, Ohio was filmed in the middle of a heated exchange with another unidentified man who said he was just trying to take photos of the demonstration. The protester became angry and started to raise his voice. “Who the f*** are you to tell me a goddamn thing? F*** your flag dog, f*** your flag. F*** the Army,” the protester said. “You are a great representative of your cause,” the man filming replied. “This is my personal beliefs, I’ll say that all day long,” the protester answered. “F*** the military, f*** your flag, f*** the police. That’s my personal beliefs.” Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StrangeSox Posted October 24, 2011 Share Posted October 24, 2011 I'm sure a radical leftist bombed a movement largely comprised of leftists, that makes perfect sense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kapkomet Posted October 24, 2011 Share Posted October 24, 2011 QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Oct 23, 2011 -> 08:27 PM) Yes they would...if they believed that by moving stuff offshore they could convince naive legislators and conservatives to support even lower tax rates. Like, for example, they might convince GWB to support a 1 time "onshoring funds tax holiday". Then following that up by massively increasing the amount of money kept overseas, so that 5 years later you could come back and insist on another "1 time onshoring tax holidary". Okay. Whatever. What would we ever do without your business saavy and corporate executive skills? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted October 24, 2011 Share Posted October 24, 2011 QUOTE (kapkomet @ Oct 24, 2011 -> 06:57 PM) Okay. Whatever. What would we ever do without your business saavy and corporate executive skills? Not go through the 2008 collapse. But hey, continue pretending wall street has shown effective management. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kapkomet Posted October 24, 2011 Share Posted October 24, 2011 QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Oct 24, 2011 -> 06:50 PM) Not go through the 2008 collapse. But hey, continue pretending wall street has shown effective management. This isn't about "wall street". I'm so sick and f***ing tired of cliches and little soundbytes to fit stupidity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted October 25, 2011 Share Posted October 25, 2011 QUOTE (kapkomet @ Oct 24, 2011 -> 06:57 PM) Okay. Whatever. What would we ever do without your business saavy and corporate executive skills? QUOTE (kapkomet @ Oct 24, 2011 -> 07:56 PM) This isn't about "wall street". I'm so sick and f***ing tired of cliches and little soundbytes to fit stupidity. Yeah, what would we do without cliches and little soundbytes, like making fun of someone's business saavy and corporate skills as a substitute for any sort of legit discussion. When Democrats do it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kapkomet Posted October 25, 2011 Share Posted October 25, 2011 You completely turned the conversation into that. It's what you do when you can't talk your way out of something. GREED. BANKERS. WALL STREET. CORPORATIONS. SUCK. That's about it, right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StrangeSox Posted October 25, 2011 Share Posted October 25, 2011 yeah but its accurate so... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kapkomet Posted October 25, 2011 Share Posted October 25, 2011 QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Oct 24, 2011 -> 07:25 PM) yeah but its accurate so... Soundbytes. Drama. GREEED. BANKS SUCK! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted October 25, 2011 Share Posted October 25, 2011 Regulation! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kapkomet Posted October 25, 2011 Share Posted October 25, 2011 QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Oct 24, 2011 -> 07:54 PM) Regulation! Oh, you mean all those regulations that banks have to follow when lending because of the government? Those?!?! Oh, oooooh, oh, ohhhhhh, BANKS SUCK! Let me throw in some Goldman Sack(s of balls). And Wall Street. Need to throw that in again. NOT ENOUGH TAXES. MORE! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted October 25, 2011 Share Posted October 25, 2011 The government told them too! It's the governments fault! That's another good silly slogan to add to your list of things we shouldn't hear again. Thanks. I'm sure that one doesn't count though since republican sound bytes are correct. No one needs to debate correct sound bytes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts