The Forum Site - Join the conversation
Forums:
Politics

plz dont vote for bush

Locked
AuthorMessage
Pages: << · 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 · >>
prophet On November 20, 2004




Cookeville, Tennessee
#16New Post! Feb 21, 2004 @ 02:49:53
you live some life, what i would give to know my children would not turn out like you
maluxx On March 15, 2004




#17New Post! Feb 21, 2004 @ 07:29:21
Honestly though... are there college people here who really give a s***? Politics are bulls*** no matter how you look at them. Id rather watch wrestling.. Im sure I can find more truth in that.
ttupirate On November 05, 2005




Cookeville, Tennessee
#18New Post! Feb 21, 2004 @ 08:20:47
Quote:
Thank you for covering a topic i can disprove so easily. I have just covered that same 20% increase in stock market in a finance class of mine. I don't need to quote you bc it was so blantant that you are calling me out on it. Here is why you are a fool for believing the market went up 20% as per what Bush and his Cabinet said. Yes, Artificially it went up...Now lets consider this. The dollar last year around this time was worth 91 or 92 cents in the world currency market. Now its down to 83 or 82 cents depending on which you read wall street journal or Barron's Journal. Anyways thats about a 10% difference. Now let me see our dollars by 10% less so the price of stock would go up 10%. The rate of inflation according to bush last year was only 4%. Funny my money buys 10% less and its only 4% huh?

Next you have to Consider this, Bush's wonderful tax cut to corporations is taking in 3 to 5% less per year( not including the tax write off that corporations can take on any new asset they purchase they can deduct 50% of its total value from net income this cannot be quantified into a percent bc of too many unknowns, it does however keep more money within the corporation for retained earnings). So you have 3 to 5% more invested in retained earnings. Meaning that you will probably issue dividends. I cannot directly quantify this amount( since more companies could use this than others and actually get higher than a 3% return and pay investors with that money) but lets say 3to 5%. Especially since there are outside factors like most companies traded on the NYSE are world wide companies and they seem to be growing (no i am not talking about Japan). So now we have a 13-15% increase in the market caused by Bush's actions. You truly would have only gotten a 5 to 7% increase in the VALUE of your stock. That is normal. He did nothing superb.

Reducing the Prime rate of interest only made investors not invest in bonds (And corporations to refinance and buy back there old bonds so they didn't have to pay 8 to 9% when they could borrow for 5%) Bonds and Stocks are almost perfectly negatively correlated (meaning when one goes up the other goes down but not always on a 1 for 1 ratio). So with bonds as a primary investing tool taken out of the picture (why would anyone get a bond with 4.5% , inflation is 4% on average). What is your primary investing tool....Stocks ! So with many Mutual fund companies having there bonds taken from there portfolios, they had to reinvest in something. Therefore if you have an open mind you can see that this 20% increase in the stock market is VERY VERY VERY artificial.

Now,

Quote:

People who have been out of work for more than a year are more than likely either disabled or unable to work... or... just dont want to get a job. C'mon, you have to know that some people are satisfied to take advantage of all the gov't programs that give out free money. They live off the gov't. It not a problem with what the gov't is doing. It is the problem of the man who wont take responsibilty and wants the gov't to give free money.


Apparently you aren't up to date on unemployment. You can only get it for 26 weeks. Congress didn't choose to keep the 13 extra weeks you could have if you were still unemployed. These benefits can start as soon as vacation, and sick leave termination days are paid. Meaning that most companies usually offer a 6 month plan, some 1 year. BUt you can get unemployment starting as soon as vacation and sick days are gone after you have been laid off / fired. No they aren't receiving more government money. Take this into consideration. China is now producing more engineers of all fields than the rest of the world. US companies and even the US military is outsourcing there R&D departments out to china bc they still don't have to be paid what an American would have to. Welcome to capitialism. Many technician jobs have been eliminated and sent to India and China. They are being paid pennies on the dollar. Ford and GM have so many cars built they are currently renting out Michigan State Fairgrounds to store cars, and recently just signed a contract with there unions to cut the workforce. I can't remember the exact amount but it was around 5 to 10%. Our jobs are going overseas faster than we can make them here. Eventually a service economy will fail, when we import so heavily.

Then again i am sure i am wasting my time typing up this fact. Bush supporters and Bush opposers will never agree. You can choose to keep typing. This isn't really worth my time. If you don't read and learn what your being told is true.....Only to some extent. IF you want more proof our economy isn't doing so hot. Look at banks in Australlia, Germany and other places....They are offering returns of 6% just from a savings account. Compare that to our stock market price increase. Maybe to say Bush is a liar is too strong....But he is deceiving. I won't have to mention too much about weapons of mass destruction, and nor will i have to mention his commision in the army and going AWOL during it(i like personally how it was hushed up so much https://www.uaw.org/cap/01/news/day3media.html, https://www.straightdope.com/columns/030411.html), or even his change in stance on Unilaterlism to Bilaterlism. Trust me i would link stuff from the Barron's and the Wall Street journal, but most of it is premium membership areas.


Blah blah blah blah blah blah... I read the first sentence of this crap and then scrolled down to see how much crap you actually wrote. No one wants to sit here and actually read all of that. If you want people to read your posts, don't make them that long. Then again this is just my opinion. If everyone else likes reading your ridiculously long posts, by all means keep it up.
maluxx On March 15, 2004




#19New Post! Feb 21, 2004 @ 10:45:50
rant reading is so much fun... they give me this warm fuzzy feeling inside. To sit down with a glass of tea, open up a forum thread that begins with a 1 sentence comment.... which in turn creates a snowball effect. Each post getting bigger and bigger until WHAM someone who thinks they have complete knowledge of a subject spits out a 10 page rant who expects people to sit there and care what he/she has to say.
maluxx On March 15, 2004




#20New Post! Feb 21, 2004 @ 10:55:54
Quote:
uhhhhh, wheres the weapons of mass distruction. get educated on the subject and look some stuff up.

oil........ thast the only damn thing this is about


Had to read this again heh, just amuzes me how some people have no concept of sarcasm. Im glad we have someone on this forum that knows what hes talking about. I no longer have to watch CNN, Ill just come in here and learn from what Keg has to say. Thank you Keg, your extensive knowledge has made things much clearer now.
ttupirate On November 05, 2005




Cookeville, Tennessee
#21New Post! Feb 21, 2004 @ 18:42:10
Operation Iraqi Liberation.... O.I.L. that's an old one.
robre On June 03, 2004




Cookeville, Tennessee
#22New Post! Feb 21, 2004 @ 20:14:13
It really doesn't matter what the economy is doing because the Fed is devouring itself to cause it. Federal funds rates are lower than the consumer price index, and it's not expected to end until 2005. Good thing our money is based on trust, too bad theres not a lot left here.

Any President that claims to have an effect on the economy is only lying for their own vanity.

P.S. President Bush is a socialist: https://www.cato.org/dailys/07-31-03.html
physician On March 15, 2004




Cookeville, Tennessee
#23New Post! Feb 21, 2004 @ 23:13:40
Main Entry: so?cial?ism
Pronunciation: 'sO-sh&-"li-z&m
Function: noun
1 : any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods

that sure sounds like a high tax on the more wealthy and a low tax on the poor. The money collected by taxes from rich people are distributed to the poorer people. Geez, that sounds like a lot of gov't programs that democrats like to promote. Thats why the high concentration of thier votes come from urban areas.

Bush tried to make it closer to a flat tax (the way i think it should be),which is definitely not socialist. A gov't that spends a lot does not mean it is socialist.
ttupirate On November 05, 2005




Cookeville, Tennessee
#24New Post! Feb 21, 2004 @ 23:45:41
The U.S. economy is a joke. We shouldn't give money to slackers who don't have jobs and don't try to get a job. There are the disabled who should get enough money to live comfortably. Aside from that (that's the only exception I can think of at the moment), people should not be able to sit around collecting money from the taxes taken from those who do work. I know there are some people out there (unemployed) that are making more money then some people who are working. What's the point of working those crappy jobs if you can just sit around getting paid? Those moochers have no dignity...

Bush is a genius, by the way

prophet On November 20, 2004




Cookeville, Tennessee
#25New Post! Feb 22, 2004 @ 01:49:14
well pirate, your right about welfare, but the liberals want everyone on welfare, that way they get elected and which is also where they got coined the "poor persons politician"....When there are those who SHOULD be on welfare (disabled) and those with limited welfare (single parents, people laid off - who get welfare for 3 months and must find a job by then)

And whoever says there are no jobs, thats retarded...maybe there are no jobs to fit your liking, but there are jobs, and beggers cannot be choosers, if its your butt working @ McDonalds or sitting @ home collecting, well by God it better be @ McDonalds - beggars cannot be choosers and no one is to good to work....
robre On June 03, 2004




Cookeville, Tennessee
#26New Post! Feb 22, 2004 @ 02:40:37
Prophet traveled in time from 1951 to deliver us this timely comparison of the republican and democratic parties:

Quote:

well pirate, your right about welfare, but the liberals want everyone on welfare, that way they get elected and which is also where they got coined the "poor persons politician"....When there are those who SHOULD be on welfare (disabled) and those with limited welfare (single parents, people laid off - who get welfare for 3 months and must find a job by then)

And whoever says there are no jobs, thats retarded...maybe there are no jobs to fit your liking, but there are jobs, and beggers cannot be choosers, if its your butt working @ McDonalds or sitting @ home collecting, well by God it better be @ McDonalds - beggars cannot be choosers and no one is to good to work....


If you read the article I put up you would discover that Bush spent a lot more money than Clinton which totally nullifies any notion that liberals want to put everyone on welfare.
----

As to Physician and his definition...

"governmental ownership and administration of the means of production"

First, the United States has no means of production. Our only source of income is financing, and since the U.S. government owns the largest bank in the county this part of the definition evaluates to be true.

"distribution of goods"

from the article:
"But perhaps we are being unfair to former President Clinton. After all, in inflation-adjusted terms, Clinton had overseen a total spending increase of only 3.5 percent at the same point in his administration. More importantly, after his first three years in office, non-defense discretionary spending actually went down by 0.7 percent. This is contrasted by Bush's three-year total spending increase of 15.6 percent and a 20.8 percent explosion in non-defense discretionary spending."

You were right about one thing. The tax cuts you claimed are "definately not socialist." You're right, cutting taxes with massive spending increases isn't socialist. It's stupid.
prophet On November 20, 2004




Cookeville, Tennessee
#27New Post! Feb 22, 2004 @ 03:44:41
Well Bush has the pressures of war, terrorism, and a re-election....Clinton had his interns to relieve his pressures...I don't think I should go into details on that

8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8)
robre On June 03, 2004




Cookeville, Tennessee
#28New Post! Feb 22, 2004 @ 05:03:47
That figure of 20% was over a period of 3 years. During a little less them two of them there was no war or terrorism. Clinton had to get reelected too. No excuses: the guy is a big spender and he needs to go.

[url=https://doobie.sublimearchive.com/download.php?fileid=845]I ain't no prophet,
Don't wanna cure no damn disease.[/url]
fastforward On February 22, 2004




Cookeville, Tennessee
#29New Post! Feb 22, 2004 @ 07:44:39
I don't agree with Bush's amnesty plan or his big spending, but I'd rather have that than Kerry who wants to turn control of the military over to the UN. What kind of coward is this guy? He got 3 Purple Hearts to come back to the states and run his "Band of Brothers" into the ground. You libs need to listen to Steve Gill, G. Gordon Liddy, or Bill O'Reilly more often.
mmgsr On December 03, 2004




Cookeville, Tennessee
#30New Post! Feb 22, 2004 @ 07:56:49
To say this war was over oil is stupid. There happens to be oil in that country, yes. There also happens to be Saddam who used the "countries oil money" for his personal use. The country didn't see any of that money. We are not taking any of the oil money from the Iraqi people. They will get more profit out of this war than we will. Bush was lead into this war because the intelligence told him there were weapons of mass destruction in the country, and Saddam doesn't have the best credentials (espessially in Bush's family). Now the intelligence is saying they were wrong and the information they had was incorrect and Iraq may not have had weapons of mass destruction. So now Bush looks like the bad guy because we have gone to war against a country who was not a threat in the first place. Sorta.
These are just the facts, personally I could not care. I'm not voting anyway. Plus, the jackass almost dies from a pretzel. Kinda make the people who fly planes into the whitehouse lawn on a suicide mission to kill the president look stupid. Oh well, Saddam was a b****, I'm glad we got him. If I were voting, I'd vote for Bush cause he got the son of a b****. And he made it legal for me to have a conceiled weapon.
Locked<< Previous Topic | Next Topic >>
Pages: << · 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 · >>

1 browsing (0 members - 1 guest)
Similar Topics
    Forum Topic Last Post Replies Views
New posts   Politics
Mon Aug 22, 2011 @ 19:54
12 1333
New posts   Random
Fri Dec 10, 2010 @ 11:30
5 858
New posts   Politics
Sat Jan 10, 2009 @ 03:29
3 832
New posts   Random
Thu Oct 16, 2014 @ 23:59
9 1370
New posts   Web Design & Coding
Sun Dec 09, 2007 @ 14:08
8 1615