Politics

[Rhode Irish]

So we need more legislation because we "think" that man is changing the climate?


Nice. Bet that turns out great.

Geez, what choice do we have? I would estimate that scientists are 99% sure that human behavior is a major contributor to the changing climate, and the changing climate is causing catastrophic weather events around the globe. I don't even know if its possible to get from 99% to 100%, but even if it were the risks inherent in waiting are far too great.

Thankfully, the number of people with attitudes like yours are dwindling, at least compared to a decade ago when this type of willful ignorance was really in vogue on the right. Obviously there is still resistance to science to be found on the polar end of the spectrum, and the spectre of allowing it to influence the debate is dangerous.

 

[Ndaccountant]

And you think eliminating corporate taxes is a problem? The double taxation that occurs for certain types of entities (namely C-Corps) is inefficient and creates some perverse incentives.

It all flows onto someone's 1040 at some point, so what's the difference?

Perhaps I misunderstood your original post. I read it as you were saying a vote for Gary was a vote against corporations.

 

[irishpat183]

Demonizing the electorate is what cost the GOP the election. As a Democrat I'd be foolish to even try to talk you down from that position because it will lead to the growth of my party and the policies I care most about.

However, as an American, I feel this type of thinking will just lead to more gridlock and obstruction in government. That is not good for this country.

The growth of your party is what's hurting our country. LOL


The growth of our federal government is hurting our country.


I wish more politicans would jsut say what's on their mind. Telling the people what they want to hear has lead us to this trainwreck.

 

[IrishinSyria]

Here's once policy thing I don't understand... why increase the capital gains tax? Is it simply to mask the cost from most people (because the majority of people pay little to no capital gains tax and therefor won't feel the effect)?

I mean, I can't think of a bigger way to stunt job growth than to increase capital gains tax. It's common sense... in a global economy, you're going to invest capital (i.e. create jobs) wherever it's most profitable... and the equation becomes less favorable for America the higher capital gains tax is. Why not leave capital gains tax where it is and increase income tax? Because you can't choose to avoid income tax... whereas a bank or investor can easily choose to invest their capital somewhere besides the United States... and frankly, if you assume there will be less investments then any increase is almost counter productive because there is less actual capital gains being taxed.......

Maybe I'm over-thinking this but it just seems like the worst possible way to address a deficit + down economy.

You'd be right on the money if a lack of capital and investment was what was driving the recession/slow recovery. But it's not. The low capital gains tax has encouraged companies to sit on record amounts of money instead of investing it in capabilities and workers. It also makes things like algorithmic trading- which really adds nothing with the possible exception of some liquidity but comes with huge risks- highly profitable compared to fields where income is taxed as income and not capital gains.

Also- the tax is at a historically low level right now. Democrats don't want to make it a high tax, just return it to Reagan/Bush 1/Clinton levels. It's been said before, but the Democratic party today is running to the right of Reagan in all but their rhetoric.

 

[CanadianIrish]

So we need more legislation because we "think" that man is changing the climate?


Nice. Bet that turns out great.

I really hope you don't work in risk management, insurance, arbitrage ... Basically anything that has to do with preparing for various options. Those might be slightly over your head.

 

[Ndaccountant]

Geez, what choice do we have? I would estimate that scientists are 99% sure that human behavior is a major contributor to the changing climate, and the changing climate is causing catastrophic weather events around the globe. I don't even know if its possible to get from 99% to 100%, but even if it were the risks inherent in waiting are far too great.

Thankfully, the number of people with attitudes like yours are dwindling, at least compared to a decade ago when this type of willful ignorance was really in vogue on the right. Obviously there is still resistance to science to be found on the polar end of the spectrum, and the spectre of allowing it to influence the debate is dangerous.

Not that I disagree with you, but at one point scientists thought the world was flat, that the earth was the center of the universe, that you could "cure"homosexuality, etc. The scientific community is not infallible. Dissent can be a good thing.

 

[Whiskeyjack]

I am a registered Libertarian and I voted for Gary. I get so much crap by people telling me I am throwing my vote away and things like that. A third party needs to be in the debates and the segment of the population that is voting for third parties is growing each year. My hope is that in my lifetime I get to see a shift away from the "two party" system.

There's a certain amount of truth to that argument. Our system of government is extremely hostile to 3rd parties, so there's very little chance that a candidate like Johnson will ever win.

Research into political psychology indicates that much of what predisposes us toward one party or another is determined by our genetics. Unfortunately, only 10-15% of the population is predisposed toward libertarianism (I'll post the link to this when I find it), so we're doomed to remain a marginal force in American politics.

Our best chance to affect real change is in converting Republicans and influencing the GOP; the Democrats are ideologically so dedicated to statism/ government paternalism that there's no hope on that front.

Fortunately, the GOP is reeling right now. Having been unable to win the White House in the current economic climate, they should be reevaluating their electoral strategies. Rather, they'd better be, or their future prospects will continue to dim; demographic trends in this country are decidedly negative for the GOP. Here's hoping they opt for improved ideological consistency by adopting more libertarian positions.

 

[Whiskeyjack]

Here's a WSJ article discussing the research into political psychology I referenced above.

Point being, libertarians are apparently weird-- both politically and emotionally. I'm OK with it, but it doesn't give me much hope about our chances of winning a major election.

 

[GO IRISH!!!]

There's a certain amount of truth to that argument. Our system of government is extremely hostile to 3rd parties, so there's very little chance that a candidate like Johnson will ever win.

Research into political psychology indicates that much of what predisposes us toward one party or another is determined by our genetics. Unfortunately, only 10-15% of the population is predisposed toward libertarianism (I'll post the link to this when I find it), so we're doomed to remain a marginal force in American politics.

Our best chance to affect real change is in converting Republicans and influencing the GOP; the Democrats are ideologically so dedicated to statism/ government paternalism that there's no hope on that front.

Fortunately, the GOP is reeling right now. Having been unable to win the White House in the current economic climate, they should be reevaluating their electoral strategies. Rather, they'd better be, or their future prospects will continue to dim; demographic trends in this country are decidedly negative for the GOP. Here's hoping they opt for improved ideological consistency by adopting more libertarian positions.

You're right about the GOP. There will be opportunities for converting many voters and many politicians themselves should they choose to leave the party based on the direction it is heading.

I believe a change can happen and I think when it does happen, it will be rather dramatic. The Republicans and Democrats are not prepared. If a portion of the population can really get galvanized behind some candidate or party, it could really disrupt the whole system and I, for one, would love to see that happen. Someone is out there that can do it. With the way viral media can influence widely and very quickly, the potential exists for some very exciting changes to take place on a very wide scale.

I'm not saying the Libertarian party is necessarily the answer, but I think having a different point of view in the debates and the mainstream campaigns would be a really positive thing that could bring about a significant change in the way average Americans view the political system. At the very least, having more third party candidates in major offices would help combat against all the partisan politics that just bog the whole system down.

 

[jason_h537]

Not that I disagree with you, but at one point scientists thought the world was flat, that the earth was the center of the universe, that you could "cure"homosexuality, etc. The scientific community is not infallible. Dissent can be a good thing.

Scientists always dissent, that is in their nature. Scientists love to argue. Your argument goes against what you are saying. The establishment refuses to accept climate change and science says unanimously that it is real and humans are the major contributor. Basically, people are saying the Earth is flat and science is being demonized for saying the facts say otherwise.

 

[DSully1995]

Not that I disagree with you, but at one point scientists thought the world was flat, that the earth was the center of the universe, that you could "cure"homosexuality, etc. The scientific community is not infallible. Dissent can be a good thing.

Scientists or Preachers? Its been over 2000 years that true scientist have known the earth was round, its flatness was perpetuated by a resistance of evidence based on religious views...

 

[DSully1995]

Here's once policy thing I don't understand... why increase the capital gains tax? Is it simply to mask the cost from most people (because the majority of people pay little to no capital gains tax and therefor won't feel the effect)?

I mean, I can't think of a bigger way to stunt job growth than to increase capital gains tax. It's common sense... in a global economy, you're going to invest capital (i.e. create jobs) wherever it's most profitable... and the equation becomes less favorable for America the higher capital gains tax is. Why not leave capital gains tax where it is and increase income tax? Because you can't choose to avoid income tax... whereas a bank or investor can easily choose to invest their capital somewhere besides the United States... and frankly, if you assume there will be less investments then any increase is almost counter productive because there is less actual capital gains being taxed.......

Maybe I'm over-thinking this but it just seems like the worst possible way to address a deficit + down economy.

Yep, I fully undertsand a personal income tax hike but Capital gains and corporate tax rates have to be as low as damn possible, or else everyone will "move" to Switzerland.

 

[jason_h537]

You're right about the GOP. There will be opportunities for converting many voters and many politicians themselves should they choose to leave the party based on the direction it is heading.

I believe a change can happen and I think when it does happen, it will be rather dramatic. The Republicans and Democrats are not prepared. If a portion of the population can really get galvanized behind some candidate or party, it could really disrupt the whole system and I, for one, would love to see that happen. Someone is out there that can do it. With the way viral media can influence widely and very quickly, the potential exists for some very exciting changes to take place on a very wide scale.

I'm not saying the Libertarian party is necessarily the answer, but I think having a different point of view in the debates and the mainstream campaigns would be a really positive thing that could bring about a significant change in the way average Americans view the political system. At the very least, having more third party candidates in major offices would help combat against all the partisan politics that just bog the whole system down.

I am sorry to say that Libertarianism is not the answer. How do Libertarians handle hurricanes and national disasters? Leave it to the state? what if the state is underwater? What if it hits multiple states?

As for the GOP, we said this 4 years ago, and we are saying it again. How can the GOP be a competitive national party if they continue to become more conservative. The moment Mitt Romney said self-deportation in the GOP debates, he lost the Latino vote. The nation is watching and Republicans are arguing over whether gay's should be treated as equals, whether women have the right to control their body, whether healthcare is a right or privilege. Name 1 Republican in office who supports gay rights. We just saw 3 states vote to allow gay marriage and the GOP is becoming more christian and more white and more male.

Look at the Tea Party, that was the GOP's big response to the 08 landslide, and they got kicked out of office in 2012. West, Akin, Mourdock, all out. Bachmaan squeeked out a victory. This isn't a debate about fiscal conservatism. This is a party who's social policies are moving backwards when the country is changing.

Another major GOP problem is their media outlets. All the data, all the poll analysts said that Obama was going to win. Even when the media was talking about Romney's "momentum" the data said Obama would win. Fox news, Limbaugh, talked media bias, skewed polls, and told the GOP base what they wanted to hear instead of the facts. Maybe, just maybe, the media isn't as liberal as you want to believe. As long as the GOP would rather live in their own world, rather than listen to actual news, they won't change.

 

[IrishLax]

Yep, I fully undertsand a personal income tax hike but Capital gains and corporate tax rates have to be as low as damn possible, or else everyone will "move" to Switzerland.

 

[DSully1995]

Serious, I do support the highest tax brack going up to 39.6(especially with the trouble your in), but keeping corporate and capital gains taxes low...

 

[Whiskeyjack]

I am sorry to say that Libertarianism is not the answer. How do Libertarians handle hurricanes and national disasters? Leave it to the state? what if the state is underwater? What if it hits multiple states?

Um, what? While anarchism is technically within the libertarian ambit, it's certainly not descriptive of the libertarian mainstream.

To answer your question, most libertarians would agree that disaster relief is a good use of Federal power.

 

[RDU Irish]

How exactly are Republicans "reeling" from the election? They picked up a ton of ground from 2008. Unseating an incumbent is not easy. Losses in Senate are largely attributable to really dumb statements by the Republican candidates in some of those elections.

All they need to do is wise up to the folly of hyper-anti-abortion stances and embrace immigration and they are on track. How hard is it to acknowledge you aren't going to throw people in jail for having an abortion? Or maybe dish out green cards like candy to address illegal immigrants?

And Obama had 13% of the electorate locked up in his favor based solely on the color of his skin. If he is 100% white he loses this thing handily.

So yes, as long as democrats put minorities at the top of their ticket they are pretty much a lock to win regardless of qualifications. Call that sour grapes, but evidence supports the case strongly.

 

[IrishLax]

Serious, I do support the highest tax brack going up to 39.6(especially with the trouble your in), but keeping corporate and capital gains taxes low...

OK yeah I wasn't sure what the quotation marks around "move" meant but I get what you're saying now.

 

[Buster Bluth]

Serious, I do support the highest tax brack going up to 39.6(especially with the trouble your in), but keeping corporate and capital gains taxes low...

Explain that to small businesses..

 

[DSully1995]

How exactly are Republicans "reeling" from the election? They picked up a ton of ground from 2008. Unseating an incumbent is not easy. Losses in Senate are largely attributable to really dumb statements by the Republican candidates in some of those elections.

All they need to do is wise up to the folly of hyper-anti-abortion stances and embrace immigration and they are on track. How hard is it to acknowledge you aren't going to throw people in jail for having an abortion? Or maybe dish out green cards like candy to address illegal immigrants?

And Obama had 13% of the electorate locked up in his favor based solely on the color of his skin. If he is 100% white he loses this thing handily.

So yes, as long as democrats put minorities at the top of their ticket they are pretty much a lock to win regardless of qualifications. Call that sour grapes, but evidence supports the case strongly.

Polling was done a while back, a Generic Republican handily beat Obama, this is terrible for GOP, worst economic downturn in 80 years and you cant beat the incumbent?

 

[jason_h537]

How exactly are Republicans "reeling" from the election? They picked up a ton of ground from 2008. Unseating an incumbent is not easy. Losses in Senate are largely attributable to really dumb statements by the Republican candidates in some of those elections.

All they need to do is wise up to the folly of hyper-anti-abortion stances and embrace immigration and they are on track. How hard is it to acknowledge you aren't going to throw people in jail for having an abortion? Or maybe dish out green cards like candy to address illegal immigrants?

And Obama had 13% of the electorate locked up in his favor based solely on the color of his skin. If he is 100% white he loses this thing handily.

So yes, as long as democrats put minorities at the top of their ticket they are pretty much a lock to win regardless of qualifications. Call that sour grapes, but evidence supports the case strongly.

That is the problem. Obama got 100% because of his skin? Really? How much of the black vote did Allen West get? There is this idea that minorities are a monolith. They all think the same. Palin was going to lock in the female vote. Rubio will lock in the Hispanic vote in 2016. That is completely false. As long as Republicans continue this idea of creators and moochers, of "real" America vs. the other, of religious rights over individual rights, and that compromise is a dirty word, they will lose over and over again.

You already hear the excuses on talk radio. Romney wasn't conservative enough, Sandy was the October surprise, Christie betrayed his party, the takers are now the majority. That is all BS, Republicans lost because they had no new ideas and their social policy continues to go backwards. If Herman Cain was running against Hillary Clinton, Hillary would get 100% of the black vote. That is what Republicans don't get, and that is why they will continue to lose in the future.

 

[IrishLax]

IMO, this election was a referendum on social conservatism and nothing else.

People DO NOT TOLERATE very conservative stances like Mourdock and Akin had. They also voted to legalize marijuana and approve gay marriage in multiple states. And George Allen losing to Tim Kaine after Tim Kaine f*cked Northern Virginia in the *** for years as Governor shows that people are willing to forgive a lot if they agree with your stances/won't vote for a guy they have fundamental disagreements with.

People thought this election would be about the economy and it clearly wasn't. I just read something that said this is the highest unemployment rate a President has ever gotten re-elected with. Kinda crazy. Obama simply carried the minority vote to an insane level because they couldn't identify with Romney... 93% black, 73% Asian, 71% Latino... only got 43% of the white vote.

 

[Whiskeyjack]

How exactly are Republicans "reeling" from the election? They picked up a ton of ground from 2008. Unseating an incumbent is not easy. Losses in Senate are largely attributable to really dumb statements by the Republican candidates in some of those elections.

Because Obama was an historically weak incumbent, and they couldn't even make it a close contest.

All they need to do is wise up to the folly of hyper-anti-abortion stances and embrace immigration and they are on track. How hard is it to acknowledge you aren't going to throw people in jail for having an abortion? Or maybe dish out green cards like candy to address illegal immigrants?

So, drop the social half of their platform? I'll believe that when I see it.

And Obama had 13% of the electorate locked up in his favor based solely on the color of his skin. If he is 100% white he loses this thing handily.

Because Clinton got hardly any African-American votes.

So yes, as long as democrats put minorities at the top of their ticket they are pretty much a lock to win regardless of qualifications. Call that sour grapes, but evidence supports the case strongly.

Social conservatism is the only thing that distinguishes the Republicans from the Democrats right now, so I doubt they'll be able to drop it as quickly as you suggest.

America is headed in the same direction under either party-- bigger government, crony capitalism, more war, and declining civil rights. The only difference is how quickly we get there.

 

[DSully1995]

Explain that to small businesses..

Become a corporation? and you wouldnt be making the top bracket if your a small business would you? I dont understand what you meaning exactly

 

[IrishLax]

Explain that to small businesses..

What do you mean? Small businesses like capital gains tax being low because it's easier to get investors to take a risk on you, it's easier to sell your company, etc... as well as lots of indirect reasons. I dunno... I work in structural engineering and there are a lot of developers/finance people who have told me unequivocally that in order to make deals and build buildings it just has to be profitable with acceptable risk. When the profit margin goes down, it gets harder to make the deal, because you get closer and closer to risk outweighing reward.

Engineers, contractors, etc. all depend on people being willing to make investments and take risks... otherwise there is no work to get done. I'd rather pay a little more in income tax than risk less people being willing to invest/risk capital => shortage of work => people getting fired and businesses shutting down like what happened a couple years ago.

 

[NoJusticeNoPeace]

IMO, this election was a referendum on social conservatism and nothing else.

People DO NOT TOLERATE very conservative stances like Mourdock and Akin had. They also voted to legalize marijuana and approve gay marriage in multiple states. And George Allen losing to Tim Kaine after Tim Kaine f*cked Northern Virginia in the *** for years as Governor shows that people are willing to forgive a lot if they agree with your stances/won't vote for a guy they have fundamental disagreements with.

People thought this election would be about the economy and it clearly wasn't. I just read something that said this is the highest unemployment rate a President has ever gotten re-elected with. Kinda crazy. Obama simply carried the minority vote to an insane level because they couldn't identify with Romney... 93% black, 73% Asian, 71% Latino... only got 43% of the white vote.

Which is wonderful for the country because social conservatism is overall embarrassing for the country. Now is the time to capitalize on it and try to get some drug reform and marriage equality on the national scale.

 

[RDU Irish]

Corporate tax starts at 15%, increases to 25% at $50,000 income, 34% @ $75,000 and 39% @ $100,000 then back down to 34% to $10 mil and up and down between 35% and 38% from there.

Individual tax bracket (after standard deductions and personal exemptions) start at 10% up to about $10,000, then 15% to $35,000, 25% to $85,0000, 28% to $175,000, 33% to $380,000 and 35% above that.

So corporations generally taxed higher, sooner than individuals. Besides the fact that after paying corporate taxes, you have to pay dividend taxes on personal income taxes for distributions. S Corp status makes tons more sense to avoid double taxation, which is why most small business goes this route.

 

[jason_h537]

Boehner just spoke. Said will not budge on taxes for top earners and must cut social programs. Back to square one.

 

[Ultimate Penn St. Hater]

And by that time, it'll be too late.

Besides, man doesn't create global warming. So there is nothing we can do about the earth cycles anyway.

Right. What do scientists know about anything anyway? After all, the earth is only 5,000 years old.

 

[irishpat183]

IMO, this election was a referendum on social conservatism and nothing else.

People DO NOT TOLERATE very conservative stances like Mourdock and Akin had. They also voted to legalize marijuana and approve gay marriage in multiple states. And George Allen losing to Tim Kaine after Tim Kaine f*cked Northern Virginia in the *** for years as Governor shows that people are willing to forgive a lot if they agree with your stances/won't vote for a guy they have fundamental disagreements with.

People thought this election would be about the economy and it clearly wasn't. I just read something that said this is the highest unemployment rate a President has ever gotten re-elected with. Kinda crazy. Obama simply carried the minority vote to an insane level because they couldn't identify with Romney... 93% black, 73% Asian, 71% Latino... only got 43% of the white vote.

Which is insane. Minority unemployment is at an all time high. Especially amoung blacks (16%) (black teenagers are at about 40%)


So I'm not sure how anyone, especially the unemployed, can vote for that.


Voting for a guy you "identify" with....LOL. Biggest crock of crap when it comes to politicans.