Ornery.org
  Front Page   |   About Ornery.org   |   World Watch   |   Guest Essays   |   Contact Us

The Ornery American Forum Post New Topic  Post A Reply
my profile login | register | search | faq | forum home

  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» The Ornery American Forum » General Comments » Is TomDavidson is right? (Page 1)

 - UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!   This topic comprises 4 pages: 1  2  3  4   
Author Topic: Is TomDavidson is right?
G2
unregistered


 - posted            Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
One of TomDavidson's recurrent themes is people are too stupid to be trusted. Could he be correct? From a couple of places around the web there's the report that Zogby did a post election survey of over 500 self-professed Obama voters with an MOE of 4.4%; 55% having a college degree and over 97% having a high-school diploma. Pretty educated group - over half with a college degree and a massive number of them being high school graduates.

There were 12 multiple-choice questions and with all that education only 2.4% got at least 11 correct. Only 0.5% got all them correct. These were not difficult questions either, most of you here will find the answers painfully obvious yet less than 1% could get all 12.

57.4 could NOT correctly say which party controls congress (50/50 shot just by guessing). With the MOE, that means people really were just guessing. They had no idea, none.

88.4% could NOT correctly say that Obama said his policies would likely bankrupt the coal industry and make energy rates skyrocket. This is the media's fault for not reporting it but it's not like it was classified either - although if your news source is NYT, NPR or the MSM then you probably really did never hear about it. Think about that, Obama is talking about bankrupting the industry that provides the most significant portion of our energy needs and people had no idea.

81.8% could NOT correctly say Joe Biden quit a previous campaign because of plagiarism. You think if McCain or Palin was the correct answer they would have heard about it 24/7? Yeah, they would have.

What did these people know? Only 13.7% failed to identify Sarah Palin as the person on which their party spent $150,000 in clothes. Only 6.2% failed to identify Palin as the one with a pregnant teenage daughter. And 86.9 % thought that Palin said that she could see Russia from her "house," even though that was Tina Fey who said that.

If there was any clearer evidence of the media bias this election cycle I don't know what it is. Watch the "man on the street" interviews from another group for a few laughs.

I disagree that these people are stupid, they're not. They're smart and apparently well educated. What these people are is manipulated through what amounts to a Orwellian misinformation campaign. Many of their answers were obvious guesses while many were skewed outside of the realm of guesswork to be dramatically incorrect. Very often these people were informed, just not told the truth. If these people have any fault it's that they trust the media to give them the truth.

IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
RickyB
Member
Member # 1464

 - posted      Profile for RickyB   Email RickyB   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
"One of TomDavidson's recurrent themes is people are too stupid to be trusted."

Wow. Right off the bat, too.

Tom, just for the record? [Smile]

Posts: 19145 | Registered: Jan 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Haggis
Member
Member # 2114

 - posted      Profile for Haggis   Email Haggis   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Premise:

One of TomDavidson's recurrent themes is people are too stupid to be trusted.

Evidence:

Thread Title: "Is Tom Davidson is Right?"

That's an open and shut case there, G2.

Posts: 1771 | Registered: Oct 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
TommySama
Member
Member # 2780

 - posted      Profile for TommySama   Email TommySama       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Simple. Elegant.
Posts: 6396 | Registered: Feb 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
G2
unregistered


 - posted            Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
He has made that claim before, I know I and several other responded to it. That it doesn't conform to your perception is not surprising. That you guys want to focus on that to distract from the point of all this is not surprising either. I forget, what logical fallacy is that?
IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
JoshCrow
Member
Member # 6048

 - posted      Profile for JoshCrow   Email JoshCrow   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Uh... G2 has simply ignored the possibility that someone who voted for a candidate is not apt to check a box casting their candidate negatively. A basic understanding of how human psychology works is in order here... but of all people, I expected G2 to be familiar with cognitive dissonance.

This seems obvious to me - and has nothing to do with "intelligence".

Example: A woman walks out of a grocery store carrying a sack of sweet potatoes. You ask her to fill out a form with the statement "100g of carrots contains more vitamins than 100g of sweet potatoes". I guarantee you'll see some cognitive dissonance in the result.

[ November 18, 2008, 10:40 AM: Message edited by: JoshCrow ]

Posts: 2281 | Registered: Mar 2008  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
OpsanusTau
Member
Member # 2350

 - posted      Profile for OpsanusTau   Email OpsanusTau   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Now, G2 - you also demonstrably trust certain media outlets to tell you the truth and are undeterred when they are proven to have their pants completely and constantly on fire.

Maybe you and these people, and all the people who thought that Saddam Hussein had something to do with 9/11, and for good measure all the rest of us, would benefit from a gigantic nationwide session about critical reading and critical thinking.

Please don't pretend you are somehow less gullible than your average kneejerk liberal, it's not convincing.

Posts: 3791 | Registered: Mar 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
TomDavidson
Member
Member # 99

 - posted      Profile for TomDavidson   Email TomDavidson   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
I disagree that these people are stupid, they're not. They're smart and apparently well educated.
Having a college degree does not make you well-educated. And being well-educated does not make you smart.

I'm sort of disappointed that we're discussing this recurring theme, by the way. I have a number of recurring themes, many of which were written by John Williams, and most of them are a lot easier to dance to.

--------

As a side note: G2, you might want to give more information about that Zogby poll. It sounds pretty darn suspect, based on your examples.

[ November 18, 2008, 10:39 AM: Message edited by: TomDavidson ]

Posts: 22935 | Registered: Nov 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pyrtolin
Member
Member # 2638

 - posted      Profile for Pyrtolin   Email Pyrtolin   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by G2:

There were 12 multiple-choice questions and with all that education only 2.4% got at least 11 correct. Only 0.5% got all them correct. These were not difficult questions either, most of you here will find the answers painfully obvious yet less than 1% could get all 12.

It's not surprising, when many of the questions are loaded or otherwise have no correct answer.

http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2008/11/zogby-engages-in-apparent-push-polling.html

quote:

57.4 could NOT correctly say which party controls congress (50/50 shot just by guessing). With the MOE, that means people really were just guessing. They had no idea, none.

Heck, we see that here frequently when people blame actions of Congress in the late 90's and most of the 00's to date on the Democrats that didn't have control till 2006.

quote:

88.4% could NOT correctly say that Obama said his policies would likely bankrupt the coal industry and make energy rates skyrocket. This is the media's fault for not reporting it but it's not like it was classified either - although if your news source is NYT, NPR or the MSM then you probably really did never hear about it. Think about that, Obama is talking about bankrupting the industry that provides the most significant portion of our energy needs and people had no idea.



This is an excellent example of the problem with the questions asked. People had trouble with it because that's not what he said, no matter how much conservative pundits tried to spin it that way. He said that industries that use coal but don't adopt clean-coal technology would be forced out of business. He explicitly said he was taking it off the "ideologically bad" table, but that it would be untenable to continue to continue to get away with not paying for environmental damage if they continue to refuse to upgrade their equipment.
[/QB][/QUOTE]

Posts: 11997 | Registered: Oct 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
The Drake
Member
Member # 2128

 - posted      Profile for The Drake   Email The Drake   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Interesting that you would bring up the coal industry quote. How many people do you think care about the coal industry? Obama has given about 100,000 quotes in the course of the year. Why would you expect anyone to be familiar a clip of a tape that wasn't in a televised speech or debate?

I actually never heard that quote before. Am I now stupid because of it? Have I been rendered ignorant by the mainstream media? Let's check the transcript.

quote:
I was the first to call for a 100% auction on the cap and trade system, which means that every unit of carbon or greenhouse gases emitted would be charged to the polluter.... So if somebody wants to build a coal-powered plant, they can; it's just that it will bankrupt them because they're going to be charged a huge sum for all that greenhouse gas that's being emitted.
So, first off, he's not "bankrupting the coal industry" because in such a scheme existing plants would be grandfathered in. He's stopping the coal industry from expanding, if they can't trade as clean as other technologies.

Then you could look at McCain who also supported a cap and trade on emissions. Very similar to Obama's proposal. So what impact should it have on the election? Not much.

http://www.howobamagotelected.com/

That's the source you didn't bother to link. A site railing against MSM for various and sundry crimes. Apparently, that's been a recurring theme of Ziegler's, if you look at his website.

Unfortunately, the raw data on the commissioned Zogby poll has not been made available, so it is impossible to judge how fair it is.

The general premise that too many voters base their information on 60-second ads, or party affiliation, or random mood swings is probably true. But the same goes for both mainstream sides of the election, leaving the process fair but flawed.

Posts: 7707 | Registered: Oct 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
JoshCrow
Member
Member # 6048

 - posted      Profile for JoshCrow   Email JoshCrow   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Pyrtolin:
It's not surprising, when many of the questions are loaded or otherwise have no correct answer.

http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2008/11/zogby-engages-in-apparent-push-polling.html


Thank you, Pyrtolin.

G2, this "poll" is clearly dubious.

Posts: 2281 | Registered: Mar 2008  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pinochio
Member
Member # 6367

 - posted      Profile for Pinochio         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by G2:
[QB] One of TomDavidson's recurrent themes is people are too stupid to be trusted. Could he be correct?

Lets see...

People just elected a community activist as the POTUS who has never had any managerial experience, never had a free market job, never has been responsible for making payroll, producing a product, being accountable in anyway and has absolutely NO ACCOMPLISHMENTS to speak of.

People just re-elected the most extreme left-wing congress and senate in the history of the country.

People just allowed their congressman and senators to give away over 600 billion dollars to their friends on Wall Street.

People overwhelmingly believe that Nanny Government is more preferable to individual freedoms and responsibility.

I find it hard to argue with TomDavidson's comment.

Posts: 111 | Registered: Nov 2008  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
JoshCrow
Member
Member # 6048

 - posted      Profile for JoshCrow   Email JoshCrow   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Pinochio:
quote:
Originally posted by G2:
[QB] One of TomDavidson's recurrent themes is people are too stupid to be trusted. Could he be correct?

Lets see...

People just elected a community activist as the POTUS who has never had any managerial experience, never had a free market job, never has been responsible for making payroll, producing a product, being accountable in anyway and has absolutely NO ACCOMPLISHMENTS to speak of.

People just re-elected the most extreme left-wing congress and senate in the history of the country.

People just allowed their congressman and senators to give away over 600 billion dollars to their friends on Wall Street.

People overwhelmingly believe that Nanny Government is more preferable to individual freedoms and responsibility.

I find it hard to argue with TomDavidson's comment.

People disagree with me... therefore... they must be stupid!
Posts: 2281 | Registered: Mar 2008  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
munga
Member
Member # 6006

 - posted      Profile for munga   Email munga   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Pinochio,

Remember that the choice was really bad- elect someone without managerial experiece and 12 years of teaching constitutional law, or elect someone with nothing particular but military experience and desire to use it.

That, and the conservative fiscal policy is creating poverty, and you have a landslide.

Posts: 5515 | Registered: Jan 2008  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Everard
unregistered


 - posted            Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Electing someone with executive, and business experience, just turned out really well for us, huh?
IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pinochio
Member
Member # 6367

 - posted      Profile for Pinochio         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Everard:
Electing someone with executive, and business experience, just turned out really well for us, huh?

We elected someone who was successfull in business and as an executive? Who was that???? Nothing drives me crazy more than people who defend one person by bashing another. GWBush isnt gonna be our president for much longer -- GET OVER IT, or your gonna be lost when January rolls around and you have no one to vent your rage on.
Posts: 111 | Registered: Nov 2008  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pinochio
Member
Member # 6367

 - posted      Profile for Pinochio         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by munga:

That, and the conservative fiscal policy is creating poverty, and you have a landslide. [/QB]

WTF are you talking about? What conservative fiscal policy are you talking about? Has any conservative fiscal policies been implemented in the past decade? are you still talking from your parallel universe?
Posts: 111 | Registered: Nov 2008  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Haggis
Member
Member # 2114

 - posted      Profile for Haggis   Email Haggis   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Pinochio,

So you are saying that people magically got dumber since 2004?

Posts: 1771 | Registered: Oct 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Everard
unregistered


 - posted            Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
You missed the point, huh?
Let me try again, without the sarcasm.

Bush had Executive and Business experience. He sucked as president. With that fresh in our minds, electing someone with neither is not exactly evidence of stupidity. Its trying something new after the old idea failed.

IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pinochio
Member
Member # 6367

 - posted      Profile for Pinochio         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Haggis:
So you are saying that people magically got dumber since 2004?

I'm not saying anything. I just laid out the facts. TomDavidson is the one who made the controversial statement --- ask him, not me.

[ November 18, 2008, 12:02 PM: Message edited by: Pinochio ]

Posts: 111 | Registered: Nov 2008  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Wayward Son
Member
Member # 210

 - posted      Profile for Wayward Son   Email Wayward Son   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
...GET OVER IT, or your gonna be lost when January rolls around and you have no one to vent your rage on.
Don't worry, Pinochio. We'll still have the Conservative Elitists and their blanant spin. As long as we have ideologues who don't care about facts or other viewpoints, and berate those who disagree with them, we'll have plenty of people to rage on. [Big Grin]

I mean, were Conservatives worried when G.W. Bush was elected? [Wink]

[ November 18, 2008, 11:59 AM: Message edited by: Wayward Son ]

Posts: 8681 | Registered: Dec 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pinochio
Member
Member # 6367

 - posted      Profile for Pinochio         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Everard:
Its trying something new after the old idea failed.

Trying a logical and well thought-out new approach to something is a great route to take. I'd be happy to listen to what this approach is that you are talking about. So far all I have heard from Obama is mushy, feelings based platitudes with no specifics except for repackaged and failed 50 year old tax and spend liberalism.

Please, list these innovative and bold NEW ideas. I'm really interested.

[ November 18, 2008, 12:07 PM: Message edited by: Pinochio ]

Posts: 111 | Registered: Nov 2008  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pinochio
Member
Member # 6367

 - posted      Profile for Pinochio         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:

I mean, were Conservatives worried when G.W. Bush was elected? [Wink] [/QB]

Are you asking me? Yes, I never liked GW Bush from the beginning. I never believed he was a fiscal conservative and I was proven right.
Posts: 111 | Registered: Nov 2008  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
RickyB
Member
Member # 1464

 - posted      Profile for RickyB   Email RickyB   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Y'all should know better by now... [Razz]
Posts: 19145 | Registered: Jan 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pinochio
Member
Member # 6367

 - posted      Profile for Pinochio         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Know better about what?

[ November 18, 2008, 12:06 PM: Message edited by: Pinochio ]

Posts: 111 | Registered: Nov 2008  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Wayward Son
Member
Member # 210

 - posted      Profile for Wayward Son   Email Wayward Son   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
TomDavidson is the one who made the controversial statement --- ask him, not me.
It should be pointed out that Tom did not make that quote. It is a paraphrase of what G2 understood Tom to say (or, more precisely, G2's spin on things that Tom has said).
Posts: 8681 | Registered: Dec 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
The Drake
Member
Member # 2128

 - posted      Profile for The Drake   Email The Drake   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Personally, I like the idea that President Obama does not have strong ties to, say, the oil industry or other businesses. It's hard to be an impartial referee if you are a former player. Maybe he will be less beholden to his former cronies.

Logical, no?

Posts: 7707 | Registered: Oct 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
The Drake
Member
Member # 2128

 - posted      Profile for The Drake   Email The Drake   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
As for tax and spend liberalism, it would be quite a relief over borrow and spend trillion dollar deficits and de-facto nationalization of an entire industry.
Posts: 7707 | Registered: Oct 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
RickyB
Member
Member # 1464

 - posted      Profile for RickyB   Email RickyB   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Pinochio - write me an email. It's the envelope icon above my posts.
Posts: 19145 | Registered: Jan 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
KnightEnder
unregistered


 - posted            Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Is Tom Davidson right? Yes. And he is most of the time.

KE

IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pinochio
Member
Member # 6367

 - posted      Profile for Pinochio         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by The Drake:
it would be quite a relief over borrow and spend trillion dollar deficits and de-facto nationalization of an entire industry.

Thats what has me confused about you guys. The democrats in control of congress are the ones who are in favor of this 'borrow and spend' behavior. There are a few (very few) fiscal conservatives who are trying to stop this fleecing but just about 100% of the democrats OBAMA INCLUDED are infavor of this theivery. What exactly are you expecting? Obama to go against his allies in Congress? Do you think he is actually going to change his position on this bailout ripoff?

What exactly do you think the difference will be between a Bush administration and an Obama administration? (except that obama will raise his and and part oceans, end global warming and end world hunger) I'm afraid that way to many liberals are living in a fantasy world.

[ November 18, 2008, 01:29 PM: Message edited by: Pinochio ]

Posts: 111 | Registered: Nov 2008  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Finvarra
Member
Member # 2786

 - posted      Profile for Finvarra   Email Finvarra       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Ev

I voted with Obama but I still have a problem with this statement.

"Bush had Executive and Business experience. He sucked as president. With that fresh in our minds, electing someone with neither is not exactly evidence of stupidity. Its trying something new after the old idea failed."

In poker that would be "results oriented mentality." It's always a slight gamble in terms of who will be the better president, but having executive experience makes it more likely that you will be a good chief executive no matter how many Bush's creep in. Of course good executive experience rather than running his companies into the ground woulda been even better.

Posts: 179 | Registered: Feb 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
The Drake
Member
Member # 2128

 - posted      Profile for The Drake   Email The Drake   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Pinochio:
What exactly are you expecting? Obama to go against his allies in Congress? Do you think he is actually going to change his position on this bailout ripoff?

First, military spending will likely go down faster under Obama versus either Bush or McCain. Second, I believe taxes will be raised. Corporations, small businesses and high-income individuals (Joe the plumber?) will likely see higher taxes, fewer exemptions. Of course, you'll have to weigh that against new tax credits, etc.

With Democratic Party control of both houses and the White House, corrupt Republicans like Ted Stevens will find it harder to put their bridges and staircases into the federal budget. At least we'll only have to fund one party's pet projects.

Posts: 7707 | Registered: Oct 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
cb
Member
Member # 6179

 - posted      Profile for cb   Email cb       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by The Drake:
I actually never heard that quote before. Am I now stupid because of it? Have I been rendered ignorant by the mainstream media? Let's check the transcript.

The general premise that too many voters base their information on 60-second ads, or party affiliation, or random mood swings is probably true. But the same goes for both mainstream sides of the election, leaving the process fair but flawed.

I think the point G2 was making, (correct me if I’m wrong G2) is the impact the mainstream press had on this election. I could have answered every question in the poll – not because I’m an intellectual giant – but because I look to more than one source of information before I form an opinion. It’s not like I have a choice about hearing the liberal side of things, it’s on all my commercial TV channels and in my local newspaper. But, I make the effort to turn on the radio to listen to that hateful talk radio so as to hear the other side. Do I agree with everything I hear on talk radio…hardly, but it gives me a different perspective I can then test, research and verify. If my liberal counterparts spent as much time researching issues from both sides of the aisle before voting for them as I and many conservative do, they may still vote liberal but at least it would be an informed vote. The fact that so many Obama voters couldn’t identify the leaders of their own party or policies of their candidate (whether presented with a bias twist or not) but could immediately identify the victim of smear campaigning (pregnant daughter-see Russia from my house) should concern all of us. [Exploding]


quote:
Originally posted by JoshCrow:
quote:
Originally posted by Pyrtolin:
It's not surprising, when many of the questions are loaded or otherwise have no correct answer.

http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2008/11/zogby-engages-in-apparent-push-polling.html


Thank you, Pyrtolin.

G2, this "poll" is clearly dubious.

You can question the methodology of the poll and the wording of some of the questions, but over 50% of 400-500 Obama voters were unable to even name which party controlled congress or who the leaders of their party were. Pretty basic!

quote:
Originally posted by Wayward Son:
quote:
...GET OVER IT, or your gonna be lost when January rolls around and you have no one to vent your rage on.
Don't worry, Pinochio. We'll still have the Conservative Elitists and their blanant spin. As long as we have ideologues who don't care about facts or other viewpoints, and berate those who disagree with them, we'll have plenty of people to rage [Wink]
Why is the Conservative Elitists blatant spin and ideologues who don't care about facts or other viewpoints any more evil than the Liberal Intellectual Elitists blatant spin and ideologues who don't care about facts or other viewpoints? Your problem is you assume the POV of the ones in control of the majority of the media are right. [Roll Eyes]

quote:
Originally posted by Pinochio:
quote:

I mean, were Conservatives worried when G.W. Bush was elected? [Wink]

Are you asking me? Yes, I never liked GW Bush from the beginning. I never believed he was a fiscal conservative and I was proven right. [/QB]
I thought GWB would serve as a fiscal conservative, he didn’t and I was disappointed [Crying] . That doesn’t mean fiscal conservative policies are erroneous.
Posts: 347 | Registered: Aug 2008  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
TomDavidson
Member
Member # 99

 - posted      Profile for TomDavidson   Email TomDavidson   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
over 50% of 400-500 Obama voters were unable to even name which party controlled congress or who the leaders of their party were
That doesn't mean much until you know the selection criteria for the Obama voters in question. I also wonder how many Republicans can name the Senate Minority leader.
Posts: 22935 | Registered: Nov 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pinochio
Member
Member # 6367

 - posted      Profile for Pinochio         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by The Drake:

irst, military spending will likely go down faster under Obama versus either Bush or McCain.

Fat chance,, I'll bet you 100 to 1 that military spending will be increased because of all the nutjobs who are going to be 'testing' Obama. (like Biden admitted) but thats just my opinion and I respect your comment as your 'opinion'.

quote:
Second, I believe taxes will be raised. Corporations, small businesses and high-income individuals (Joe the plumber?) will likely see higher taxes, fewer exemptions. Of course, you'll have to weigh that against new tax credits, etc.
You are aware that during the last 3 major tax cuts in our nations history there has been a record increase in federal revenue (Kenedy,Reagan, Bush)???? Tax cuts increase federal revenue --- this is a proven fact. Why than would you be in favor of raising your employer's taxes? I find no logic in this mentality.

quote:
With Democratic Party control of both houses and the White House, corrupt Republicans like Ted Stevens will find it harder to put their bridges and staircases into the federal budget.
But non-corrupt politicians like Barney Frank, William Jefferson, Nancy Pelosi, Maxine Watters, Charles RAngle, etc... will be able to build their pet projects. You do realize that Congress is not changing hands and it is congress that makes the budget?

[ November 18, 2008, 02:12 PM: Message edited by: Pinochio ]

Posts: 111 | Registered: Nov 2008  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
MattP
Member
Member # 2763

 - posted      Profile for MattP   Email MattP   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Tax cuts increase federal revenue --- this is a proven fact.
Obviously we need to cut taxes to zero to facilitate infinite revenue growth.
Posts: 3481 | Registered: Jan 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pyrtolin
Member
Member # 2638

 - posted      Profile for Pyrtolin   Email Pyrtolin   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Pinochio:
quote:
Originally posted by The Drake:
it would be quite a relief over borrow and spend trillion dollar deficits and de-facto nationalization of an entire industry.

Thats what has me confused about you guys. The democrats in control of congress are the ones who are in favor of this 'borrow and spend' behavior. There are a few (very few) fiscal conservatives who are trying to stop this fleecing but just about 100% of the democrats OBAMA INCLUDED are infavor of this theivery. What exactly are you expecting? Obama to go against his allies in Congress? Do you think he is actually going to change his position on this bailout ripoff?

What exactly do you think the difference will be between a Bush administration and an Obama administration? (except that obama will raise his and and part oceans, end global warming and end world hunger) I'm afraid that way to many liberals are living in a fantasy world.

A scatter shot based on what Obama has stated that he'd like to implement:

Upper end taxes will increase while lower end taxes will be cut. This will put more money in consumer pockets and give small businesses a better shot at competing with large ones while reclaiming wealth that's kept out of the system by moving from investment to CEO paycheck and back again. Tax breaks for small business investments will likewise help pull market focus away from dangerously large corporations.

Tax auditing will be focused back on the top 20% of taxpayers, where the most lost income is, rather than hounding the bottom 20% over a relatively trivial amount of EITC claims.

Borrowed money will be spend creating jobs effecting infrastructure repairs and overhauls- long term investments that will reduce costs across the board and bring essential services to even remote areas of the country.

Ensuring that many more people have access to primary and preventative care will significantly reduce medical costs, strain on ERs, and the number of unpaid or outright defaulted medical debts that are crippling our hospitals.

More funding for social support and education programs will increase the ability people to find and hold gainful employment and reduce crime and unplanned pregnancies (reducing abortion rates significantly as well)
---

It's amusing to see people compare Obama to Carter- we'd be amazingly luck to have his administration end with the economy in that state- with low end economic growth so strong that upper end tax cuts are required to let suppliers keep up with the growth.

Our economy has, essentially, been set back 60 years or more, so adopting the policies that it grew on in those times is a welcome change from ones that encouraged massive oversupply while weakening consumer strength.

Posts: 11997 | Registered: Oct 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pinochio
Member
Member # 6367

 - posted      Profile for Pinochio         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by MattP:
quote:
Tax cuts increase federal revenue --- this is a proven fact.
Obviously we need to cut taxes to zero to facilitate infinite revenue growth.
I'm assuming by that statement that the laffer curve is a foreign concept to you.
Posts: 111 | Registered: Nov 2008  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Daruma28
Member
Member # 1388

 - posted      Profile for Daruma28   Email Daruma28   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Are most people in this country stupid?

Yep. And IF TD is putting that out there as a recurring theme, I'll concur wholeheartedly.

See, as I continue to flog my dead horse here, we, as a nation ARE most certainly dumber.

There is no other way the absolute rot of collectivist socialism instituted by corporate fascism could have crept it's way into every
facet of our lives. The dumbing down of the masses is how we have been transformed from the Land of the Free and Home of the Brave to the Land of the fee and home of the debt slave.

This is simply the result of the deliberate dumbing down of the masses so that the power elite can control the populace with propaganda and deceit.

There is no greater evidence of just how dumbed down this nation has become than the fact that so many people are convinced that this game we call two-party politics is real, and that by voting, you actually have a say in how this country is run, and that every person can make a difference in our "participatory democracy."

We are all nothing more than guinea pigs and cannon fodder for the corporatist/mercantile/money launderers who own our government lock - stock and barrel.

The more We the Sheeple find ourselves dependent on the Federal Government in the many ways, the more we lose our freedom, individuality, entrepreneurialship and creativity.

The American Dream used to be that through our own ingenuity and work ethic, we can build a successful life of prosperity...and there were many different paths this could be accomplished.

Now, the American Dream has become a strait-jacket definition consisting of a rigorous course that involves submitting yourselves to 4-6 years of indoctrination in "higher education" followed by climbing the corporate ladder as a cog in the corporate machine, so that you can qualify for a 30 year mortgage and the right to chain yourself into debt slavery to the banks so you can "live the American Dream and own your own home!"

We are no longer a culture that values the family as an institution.

We've outsourced raising our children to minimum wage day-care workers while mom and dad work overtime to pay of the debts accrued in the mindless chase for the ephemeral specter of happiness promised by conspicuous consumption of material goods.

Countless hours of Tell-a-Vision brainwashing we've all subjected ourselves to for our entire lives has most assuredly seen to that!

Oh, and just report to the nearest elementary school every four years to pull the lever for the Donkey or Elephant that represents the flavor of your choice to maintain the status quo, and you can be rest assured you've done your civic duty and been a responsible patriot!

[Exploding]

Posts: 7543 | Registered: Nov 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
  This topic comprises 4 pages: 1  2  3  4   

Quick Reply
Message:

HTML is not enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.
UBB Code™ Images not permitted.
Instant Graemlins
   


Post New Topic  Post A Reply Close Topic   Feature Topic   Move Topic   Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
 - Printer-friendly view of this topic
Hop To:


Contact Us | Ornery.org Front Page

Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classic™ 6.7.1