-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
US PoliGAF 2012 | The Romney VeepStakes: Waiting for Chris Christie to Sing
- Thread starter Invisible_Insane
- Start date
- Status
jamesinclair
Banned
Why aren't the republicans clapping at their president?
Buckethead
Banned
Shut your anti-piracy face Obama
TheDrowningMan
Member
If you ever doubted that every single high-ranking Republican wants America to fail in exchange for their party being in power, there's plenty of evidence on display tonight.
outunderthestars
Banned
No. Please stop creating more governmental agencies.
oh no. Now he's going to lose the vote of the GAF Piracy Defense Force!
oh no. Now he's going to lose the vote of the GAF Piracy Defense Force!
two quick observations.
One, he's making a lot of talking points that are almost impossible for the Republicans not to clap to - a stark contrast to some of his earlier speeches, where Republicans just sat around groaning and sitting in silence every other point he made. Quite some speech to go, but so far he seems to be making it difficult for the Republicans to rebuke him with silence. They're still trying, but they look silly when they do so far.
Two, I wonder if it's a conscious effort to keep co-opting some key Republican concepts, some which have even been raised by Republicans within the last decade, in order to force Republicans to continually back away from them. What I mean is, if Obama and his cabinet has made a conscious observation that the Republicans will NEVER work with him, so he must adopt plans that they support. Because they've decided the #1 thing is to make sure he's not re-elected, they'd drop support for such plans. Over a long period of time, the Republicans will have moved so far right... running away from so many of their own plans... that they will become a completely untenable party in a decade or so. I've been wondering this for a while. I don't know why I mention it here, but I keep noticing he'll adopt a key Republican point, Republicans will back away from it, and they get more extreme.
One, he's making a lot of talking points that are almost impossible for the Republicans not to clap to - a stark contrast to some of his earlier speeches, where Republicans just sat around groaning and sitting in silence every other point he made. Quite some speech to go, but so far he seems to be making it difficult for the Republicans to rebuke him with silence. They're still trying, but they look silly when they do so far.
Two, I wonder if it's a conscious effort to keep co-opting some key Republican concepts, some which have even been raised by Republicans within the last decade, in order to force Republicans to continually back away from them. What I mean is, if Obama and his cabinet has made a conscious observation that the Republicans will NEVER work with him, so he must adopt plans that they support. Because they've decided the #1 thing is to make sure he's not re-elected, they'd drop support for such plans. Over a long period of time, the Republicans will have moved so far right... running away from so many of their own plans... that they will become a completely untenable party in a decade or so. I've been wondering this for a while. I don't know why I mention it here, but I keep noticing he'll adopt a key Republican point, Republicans will back away from it, and they get more extreme.
Invisible_Insane
Member
http://userscripts.org/scripts/show/78817
Useful extension for a night like this if you're not already using it.
Useful extension for a night like this if you're not already using it.
dave is ok
aztek is ok
More government bureaucracy!
ChiTownBuffalo
Either I made up lies about the Boston Bomber or I fell for someone else's crap. Either way, I have absolutely no credibility and you should never pay any attention to anything I say, no matter what the context. Perm me if I claim to be an insider
Columbia is getting American imports?
Shoe is on the other foot.
CHINA BAD!
CHINA PIRATES!
CHINA SUBSIDIES!
Woah...China gonna be real mad.
Shoe is on the other foot.
CHINA BAD!
CHINA PIRATES!
CHINA SUBSIDIES!
Woah...China gonna be real mad.
Gary Whitta
Member
Fuck yeah, clampdown on China!
cartoon_soldier
Member
EXPANDING GOVERNMENT
DAMN SOCIALIST
Oh he said AMerica will always win...everybody CLAP!
DAMN SOCIALIST
Oh he said AMerica will always win...everybody CLAP!
Salvor.Hardin
Banned
Holy shit this is a good speech. Good policy to boot.
Big difference from Pelosi's joyous clapping standups and sitdowns.
Something Wicked
Member
First off, why are so many people here appear to be fundamentally opposed to the principles of investing? It makes GAF appear more out of touch with the average US middle class family, who generally has some exposure to equity, bond, and or money markets. Perhaps, it's mostly just the college kid crowd... Anyway, to many, using taxpayers money towards investments is consider more efficient than simply giving the money government officials when it comes to business expansion/job creation. Events like Solyndra highlight this view. Also, these days, government funds seem to go less towards business start-ups and more towards required by law public union pension funds. Many of such union pension funds are actually quite dependent on equity markets, in which if capital gains taxes are raised on them, many state governments are going to have to take more taxpayer dollars to fill the voids (unless significant union concessions are made).
Secondly, I'd like to know what people think Romney's positions on specific tax rates are? From what I've seen, Romney has been advocating to lower the capital gains taxes on the middle income tax brackets (which are currently 15% if held for longer than a year, or 25%/28%/33% if held under a year) and lowering the federal corporate tax rate (which is the highest in the world)- putting the rate closer to most European countries'. When it comes to federal income taxes, I've seen many times Romney trying to side-step such questions and changing the subject to capital gains and corporate taxes. This gives me the impression that Romney will let the Bush tax cuts expire if he becomes President, even though he may have said otherwise at times before. Romney (like Obama) play the game of politics well- be vague about your positions and even contradict yourself at times to appease both sides.
Unlike the source of initial income, people can easily move money offshore to invest in other non-US markets. Today, there are far more stable and enticing markets to invest in compared to 20 years ago or even just 10 year ago.
Only up to $3k per year, though one keep carrying on the losses to next year. However, for the big investors $3k is nothing, and thus higher taxes can certainly become a deterrence from making certain investments.
I've been strongly promoting much higher taxes on capital gains from commodity futures. We already do so for gold, and we should make them even higher for petroleum. However, other countries (EU, Japan, China, India) would have to implement similar taxes.
Companies can adjust to different tax rates. However, the uncertainty of future tax rates will give companies much pause on how they use their current revenues. The size of future federal and state deficits simply adds to such uncertainty.
Secondly, I'd like to know what people think Romney's positions on specific tax rates are? From what I've seen, Romney has been advocating to lower the capital gains taxes on the middle income tax brackets (which are currently 15% if held for longer than a year, or 25%/28%/33% if held under a year) and lowering the federal corporate tax rate (which is the highest in the world)- putting the rate closer to most European countries'. When it comes to federal income taxes, I've seen many times Romney trying to side-step such questions and changing the subject to capital gains and corporate taxes. This gives me the impression that Romney will let the Bush tax cuts expire if he becomes President, even though he may have said otherwise at times before. Romney (like Obama) play the game of politics well- be vague about your positions and even contradict yourself at times to appease both sides.
Unlike the source of initial income, people can easily move money offshore to invest in other non-US markets. Today, there are far more stable and enticing markets to invest in compared to 20 years ago or even just 10 year ago.
Only up to $3k per year, though one keep carrying on the losses to next year. However, for the big investors $3k is nothing, and thus higher taxes can certainly become a deterrence from making certain investments.
I've been strongly promoting much higher taxes on capital gains from commodity futures. We already do so for gold, and we should make them even higher for petroleum. However, other countries (EU, Japan, China, India) would have to implement similar taxes.
Companies can adjust to different tax rates. However, the uncertainty of future tax rates will give companies much pause on how they use their current revenues. The size of future federal and state deficits simply adds to such uncertainty.
cartoon_soldier
Member
Charlotte shout out! wooooooooooooooooooooo
ChiTownBuffalo
Either I made up lies about the Boston Bomber or I fell for someone else's crap. Either way, I have absolutely no credibility and you should never pay any attention to anything I say, no matter what the context. Perm me if I claim to be an insider
First human interest story.
Four_Chamber
Member
Man, this speech is getting me amped up for election time.
dave is ok
aztek is ok
Something Wicked isn't watching
Joe Shlabotnik
Banned
That's a little 11-dimensional-chessy for me, despite the fact that it's kinda actually happening. But I think the dude's just genuinely a compromiser at heart.
outunderthestars
Banned
Wooo! I know her. We have a class together as CPCC in Charlotte. 
CPCC is a tremendous community college. Glad to see them getting recognition!
Obama visited it twice while pushing for more educational grants for displaced workers.
CPCC is a tremendous community college. Glad to see them getting recognition!
Obama visited it twice while pushing for more educational grants for displaced workers.
ChiTownBuffalo
Either I made up lies about the Boston Bomber or I fell for someone else's crap. Either way, I have absolutely no credibility and you should never pay any attention to anything I say, no matter what the context. Perm me if I claim to be an insider
It happened in the 80's when America had to deal with Japanese price dumping.
Gary Whitta
Member
As The Onion pointed out, just imagine Gingrich up there. It's unthinkable.
jamesinclair
Banned
Gop: jeeeeeerbs? Booooooooooooooo
ConfusingJazz
Member
We will use kids to do janitorial work, and send the former janitors to colonize the moon.
It's not without precedent, actually. I just wonder if Obama is frustrated enough at some point for it to have passes his mind, because one of his tactics seems to be present a Democratic plan, include a key Republican point, have Republicans abandon said point for the rest of time.
Phoenix
Member
ChiTownBuffalo
Either I made up lies about the Boston Bomber or I fell for someone else's crap. Either way, I have absolutely no credibility and you should never pay any attention to anything I say, no matter what the context. Perm me if I claim to be an insider
Jackie is looking like she wrote some shit on Facebook that Obama was a Muslim.
But I know they vetted her.
But I know they vetted her.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked