Bilers for Obama--Important notice!!

[BIG JOHN]

You republicans sound so angry and bitter.. Probably because you are gonna LOOOOOSE this election, not only the presidential, but the congress and senate are going blue too!

I'm not going to read all of this..I know what I know...but this is easy..

Obama voters are easy to spot....jobless and ignorant...why would they BITE the hand that feeds them??

Mondale stated he will raise taxes if he became prez in 1980...he lost HUGE...

WHY is it OK now for Obama to raise taxes 1 trillion dollors in 2008?? and people think its OK???

Obama- if your government supports 50% of the population or more what is that called??? and were will the $$ come from if less then 50% is working and donating to your policy??

I think its called...get off your ars...get a job...support yourself and family...and WHEN you get a paycheck...then YOU tell me its OK to take 33% + away to pay for other lazy SOB's!!!

IMHO a drug test should be mandatory for any all wellfare $$...

-BJ

FYI- EVERY big lib newspaper counted Floridas votes...EVERY one came back with a Bush victory...sorry- I used facts again...LOL

 

[MTm7]

Yeah, that is a real bipartisan site!! Nice. I do like how anti-Obama people say he has done NOTHING in Congress, then now say he was a key facilitator in the collapse.

Just another flip flop by the Republicans. Just like Obama is a Muslin, but lets criticize Obama on his Christian pastor. You cannot have it both ways.

hmmm... liberal bipartisan means only agreeing with them right? when stated in terms of "done nothing" would mean anything constructive. he is real good at being destructive so yes sorry... he has done someting. and as usual you obfuscate the truth.... was or was not obama a key figure in the propagating of the housing collapse and then make it a key campaining strategy stating the opposite? if yes then perhaps that site is just reporting facts that dont line up with your idea what is truth. therefore it is not partisan but it is you that is partisan and cant stand the truth. you are a marxist, apparently, so therefore you must defend your ideology... that's what defines you and just so happens to be what your boy nobama is about.

liberals whole ideologies are self[-defeating. what they say they are going to accomplish is ALWAYS the opposite what happens. you think giving people money is going to work... then you are an idiot. take for example the indians. the BIA is an abismal failure and yet we keep that horsecrap agency open. the BIA is just a microcosm of all government run welfare programs. it NEVER works. but apparently in your eyes it will this time because obama is the ONE.

 

[Wade]

Yes my brothers, the welfare system is broke.

Imagine, a poor single mother and minority child, living off welfare. They are so bad off, that the child one day manages to grow up healthy and strong, go to a prestigious college (Harvard), and get a degree in law, and one day become a Senator, and then run for president.

This country is really broken I tell you. What other country could this happen in?

PS: A vote for Obama is a vote for Bush.

 

[MTm7]

Yes my brothers, the welfare system is broke.

Imagine, a poor single mother and child, living off welfare. They are so bad off, that the child one day manages to grow up healthy and strong, go to a prestigious college, or two, and get a degree in law, and one day run for president. Dead near equal to the guy that grew up on military bases, his dad worked on. And then preceded to serve his country his whole life.

This country is really broken I tell you. What other non western country could be shown to be so broken?

Just remember, a vote for Obama is a vote for Bush.

sorry, wade, for my stupidity but i dont follow you. splain!!

 

[Wade]

sorry, wade, for my stupidity but i dont follow you. splain!!

Obama keeps saying that lower income people need the wealth spread around. Because their disadvantaged.

I'm just lamenting about how in the United States, a welfare person (like Obama) can one day become president. Seems like the system isn't all that broken.

Can only think of a few European countries, where that might happen. Without a coup.

I guess it needs work, I got distracted.

 

[MTm7]

Obama keeps saying that lower income people need the wealth spread around. Because their disadvantaged.

I'm just lamenting about how in the United States, a welfare person can one day become president. Seems like the system isn't all that broken, if that's possible.

Can only think of a few European countries, where that might happen.

I guess it needs work, I got distracted.

alright i got it now. good point by the way!!

 

[BlgsRX-1mtn]

way to be objective! i appreciate it. i see your from billings? are you a native?

He (2001400ex)sounds like a left coast import to me.

 

[Summit 800]

Obama's plan to raise taxes on the high income earners will further the redistribution of wealth (that's what he said). Small business owners use profits to re-invest in growth, buy equipment and create jobs. Taking money out of the hands of entrepreneurs by raising taxes and giving it the government will not bring the economy back. Here's some data on who actually pays the taxes that fund the government programs today. Yep 10% of people pay 70% of the Fed taxes.

Percentiles Ranked by AGI Adjusted Gross Income Threshold on Percentiles Percentage of Federal Personal Income Tax Paid


Top 1% $388,806 39.89%
Top 5 % $153,542 60.14%
Top 10% $108,904 70.79%
Top 25% $64,702 86.27%
Top 50% $31,987 97.01%
Bottom 50% < $31,987 2.99%

Source: IRS (Tax Year 2006)

EDIT: I can't get the table to format. Hope you can make sense of it!

America is the greatest country on earth. Big government and more government hand outs will not make this country better.

 

[2001400ex]

So, does every person have that many deductions? Or are you just generalizing. I have very few deductions, almost none.

What exactly does 2 to 4 percent mean? I interpret that as ($250K - $102K) * 6.2% = which is around 4% of taxable income. There's so little substance to the statement, I have no idea what it means, and I bet you don't either. Your just regurgitating your crib notes.

I wondered why I couldn't find the medicare, he doesn't seem to directly address it, just throws it in with payroll taxes. Nice. Later he can tell us, he never actually said he wouldn't raise it. I seem to remember this being part of the payroll increase, I guess he flip-flopped.

Where do you see it say it doesn't roll back to $102K? I can't see that. I need a link, and paragraph. Must be getting old.

No foot here, I eat beef liberally.

The score, raise the rich from 35% to 39.6% = 4.6%, plus another 4% payroll. 8.6% total. Plus capital gains.

If you are single, no kids, your standard deduction is $7,000. If you are married, it is over $10,000. It is like $3,400 per kid roughly and for you. Then if you pay medical or put into 401(k) that is all deductions. If you have mortgage interest, that is even more. So the bare minimum is $10,400 for every taxpayer and $17,000 for a married couple with no kids.

(These are rough numbers, so don't go saying the deduction is $10,200 or what it exactly is).

 

[2001400ex]

Obama's plan to raise taxes on the high income earners will further the redistribution of wealth (that's what he said). Small business owners use profits to re-invest in growth, buy equipment and create jobs. Taking money out of the hands of entrepreneurs by raising taxes and giving it the government will not bring the economy back. Here's some data on who actually pays the taxes that fund the government programs today. Yep 10% of people pay 70% of the Fed taxes.

Percentiles Ranked by AGI Adjusted Gross Income Threshold on Percentiles Percentage of Federal Personal Income Tax Paid


Top 1% $388,806 39.89%
Top 5 % $153,542 60.14%
Top 10% $108,904 70.79%
Top 25% $64,702 86.27%
Top 50% $31,987 97.01%
Bottom 50% < $31,987 2.99%

Source: IRS (Tax Year 2006)

EDIT: I can't get the table to format. Hope you can make sense of it!

America is the greatest country on earth. Big government and more government hand outs will not make this country better.

Do you have a point? Even McCain has said several times giving tax cuts to the rich does not work. Is he a flip flopper or couragous?

http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=24421

1. “I don’t think the governor’s tax cut is too big—it’s just misplaced. Sixty percent of the benefits from his tax cuts go to the wealthiest 10% of Americans—and that’s not the kind of tax relief that Americans need. … Gov. Bush wants to spend the entire surplus on tax cuts. I don’t believe the wealthiest 10% of Americans should get 60% of the tax breaks. I think the lowest 10% should get the breaks. …
“I’m not giving tax cuts for the rich.”

—Discussion with media, reported in “Bush, McCain Snip Over
Tax Cut Plans,” Los Angeles Times, and “GOP Rivals Bicker on Taxes,”
Washington Post, Jan. 5, 2000.

7. “Mr. President, the principle that guides my judgment of a tax reconciliation bill is tax relief for those who need it the most—lower- and middle-income working families. I am in favor of a tax cut, but a responsible one that provides significant tax relief for lower- and middle-income families. And I commend Sen. Grassley for moving in that direction. But I am concerned that debt will overwhelm many American households. That is why tax relief should be targeted to middle-income Americans. The more fortunate among us have less concern about debt. It is the parents struggling to make ends meet who are most in need of tax relief.

“I had expressed hope that when the reconciliation bill was reported out of the Senate Finance Committee, the tax cuts outlined would provide more tax relief to working, middle-income Americans. However, I am disappointed that the Senate Finance Committee preferred instead to cut the top tax rate of 39.6% to 36%, thereby granting generous tax relief to the wealthiest individuals of our country at the expense of lower- and middle-income American taxpayers.”

—Senate floor statement during debate over President Bush’s tax relief package, May 21, 2001.

10. MCCAIN: “Shouldn’t we give relief to average citizens who also are double taxed every single day?”

HOST KATIE COURIC: “But, Sen. McCain, if you listen to Commerce Secretary Don Evans, and he just appeared on this program, working Americans, the middle-class Americans, under the Bush proposals will get a major break. A family of four making $39,000 a year, according to Mr. Evans, will get a $1,100 tax cut for several years, allowing them to plan their individual budgets. That sounds like something that won’t just simply benefit the wealthy.”

MCCAIN: “Well, I think it will. But when you look at the percentage of the tax cuts that—as the previous tax cuts—that go to the wealthiest Americans, you will find that the bulk of it, again, goes to wealthiest Americans. … A lot of Americans now are paying a very large a—low and middle-income Americans are paying a significantly larger amount of their income in taxes. I’d like to see them get the bulk of the relief.”

—NBC’s “Today,” Jan. 7, 2003.

 

[Wade]

If you are single, no kids, your standard deduction is $7,000. If you are married, it is over $10,000. It is like $3,400 per kid roughly and for you. Then if you pay medical or put into 401(k) that is all deductions. If you have mortgage interest, that is even more. So the bare minimum is $10,400 for every taxpayer and $17,000 for a married couple with no kids.

(These are rough numbers, so don't go saying the deduction is $10,200 or what it exactly is).

One word, AMT. (uh, acronym)

 

[Wade]

Do you have a point? Even McCain has said several times giving tax cuts to the rich does not work. Is he a flip flopper or couragous?

http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=24421

1. “I don’t think the governor’s tax cut is too big—it’s just misplaced. Sixty percent of the benefits from his tax cuts go to the wealthiest 10% of Americans—and that’s not the kind of tax relief that Americans need. … Gov. Bush wants to spend the entire surplus on tax cuts. I don’t believe the wealthiest 10% of Americans should get 60% of the tax breaks. I think the lowest 10% should get the breaks. …
“I’m not giving tax cuts for the rich.”

—Discussion with media, reported in “Bush, McCain Snip Over
Tax Cut Plans,” Los Angeles Times, and “GOP Rivals Bicker on Taxes,”
Washington Post, Jan. 5, 2000.

7. “Mr. President, the principle that guides my judgment of a tax reconciliation bill is tax relief for those who need it the most—lower- and middle-income working families. I am in favor of a tax cut, but a responsible one that provides significant tax relief for lower- and middle-income families. And I commend Sen. Grassley for moving in that direction. But I am concerned that debt will overwhelm many American households. That is why tax relief should be targeted to middle-income Americans. The more fortunate among us have less concern about debt. It is the parents struggling to make ends meet who are most in need of tax relief.

“I had expressed hope that when the reconciliation bill was reported out of the Senate Finance Committee, the tax cuts outlined would provide more tax relief to working, middle-income Americans. However, I am disappointed that the Senate Finance Committee preferred instead to cut the top tax rate of 39.6% to 36%, thereby granting generous tax relief to the wealthiest individuals of our country at the expense of lower- and middle-income American taxpayers.”

—Senate floor statement during debate over President Bush’s tax relief package, May 21, 2001.

10. MCCAIN: “Shouldn’t we give relief to average citizens who also are double taxed every single day?”

HOST KATIE COURIC: “But, Sen. McCain, if you listen to Commerce Secretary Don Evans, and he just appeared on this program, working Americans, the middle-class Americans, under the Bush proposals will get a major break. A family of four making $39,000 a year, according to Mr. Evans, will get a $1,100 tax cut for several years, allowing them to plan their individual budgets. That sounds like something that won’t just simply benefit the wealthy.”

MCCAIN: “Well, I think it will. But when you look at the percentage of the tax cuts that—as the previous tax cuts—that go to the wealthiest Americans, you will find that the bulk of it, again, goes to wealthiest Americans. … A lot of Americans now are paying a very large a—low and middle-income Americans are paying a significantly larger amount of their income in taxes. I’d like to see them get the bulk of the relief.”

—NBC’s “Today,” Jan. 7, 2003.

So why are you against McCain, he sounds just like your kind of guy.

 

[MTm7]

So why are you against McCain, he sounds just like your kind of guy.

LOL!!!!

 

[Burndown1]

It was an interview done outside of a rock concert, not an Obama rally. Nice spin though. I think it was part of O'Reilly's "No-Spin Zone"

Oh my god, another intellegent Billings person. We keep this up and we could control the world. Down with tax and spend liberals, down with Oblahma, man I could get it up with Palin.

 

[MTm7]

He (2001400ex)sounds like a left coast import to me.

what i was thinking as well.

 

[2001400ex]

Oh my god, another intellegent Billings person. We keep this up and we could control the world. Down with tax and spend liberals, down with Oblahma, man I could get it up with Palin.

Tax and spend is much better than cut tax and spend, the actual Republican agenda! Were you guys not paying attention from 2001 to 2007?

 

[2001400ex]

He (2001400ex)sounds like a left coast import to me.

Raised in Port Orchard, WA. But I never paid attention to politics until 2002, about 4 years after I moved to Billings. I just heard the Republican banter and kept thinking, that does not make sense. (One example, cutting taxes actually brings in more revenue). And I starting to do research and found out I am more democratic.

 

[Wade]

Raised in Port Orchard, WA. But I never paid attention to politics until 2002, about 4 years after I moved to Billings. I just heard the Republican banter and kept thinking, that does not make sense. (One example, cutting taxes actually brings in more revenue). And I starting to do research and found out I am more democratic.

Really, so by your definition, if we raised rich people's taxs to 100% (no exemptions), would that bring in more revenue, long term? Generalizations of extrapolation, should carry out to both sides of infinity. If they don't, there's are exceptions.

Did you not understand the AMT response? Your only allowed a personal exemption of $2,637 for that salary range, due to AMT.

 

[Burndown1]

Boy I cant complain about the last 7 years. My job has been very busy, And I mean busy. If things have been so bad, why would I have been goofy busy at my job???? People spend money on toys when their feeling good about their bank account. Election year and all we here is change. Lets face it , obama is going to win. People are scared and holding on to what they have. work is slowing down because of not knowing what will happen. Mr. Billings ite look at your own city council, all they are is Liberals. hang on to your wallet. the term SID. Wow we have a Cabellas store, Bull chit on that. Well I better shut up now before I get banned from snowest.

 

[Burndown1]

I was speaking to 200140 dude.