this is going around,I've gotten it from 10 differnt people

[Rod Martin]

Author unknown:

Today on my way to lunch I passed a homeless guy with a sign that read "Vote Obama, I need the money." I laughed.

Once in the restaurant my server had on a "Obama 08" tie, again I laughed as he had given away his political preference--just imagine the coincidence.

When the bill came I decided not to tip the server and explained to him that I was exploring the Obama redistribution of wealth concept. He stood there in di sbelief while I told him that I was going to redistribute his tip to someone who I deemed more in need--the homeless guy outside. The server angrily stormed from my sight.

I went outside, gave the homeless guy $10 and told him to thank the server inside as I've decided he could use the money more. The homeless guy was grateful.

At the end of my rather unscientific redistribution experiment I realized the homeless guy was grateful for the money he did not earn, but the waiter was pretty angry that I gave away the money he did earn even though the actual recipient deserved money more.

I guess redistribution of wealth is an easier thing to swallow in concept than in practical application. REDISTRIBUTION OF SOMEONE ELSE'S WEALTH, A GREAT IDEA .............. or just a fools game?

[FishaHallic]

I heard that one on the radio today and last week. Another pathetic attempt by a party with no new thoughts on how best to run this country. In case no one noticed the republicans old thoughts don't work and that has been proven in the last 8 yrs.

[The People]

So, by comparing Obama's proposed tax policy to this story, they're saying that a construction worker, coal miner, truck driver, or teacher who earns $35K a year, did not REALLY earn their money? Money is only really deserved if it is earned by someone with an MBA or PhD or law degree who has a house in the Hamptons and a well-diversified portfolio?

These comparisons are nonsense. By the standard set in this story, if you are a hard-working middle-class American, you should be considered a bum. And, if you are among the wealthiest of Americans, you should be considered a truck stop waitress.

Why on Earth smart people have allowed thenselves to be controlled by this type of nonsense absolutely baffles me. Most of the folks who forward messages like this would actually be well served by an Obama administration. However, they're so wrapped up in the "us vs them" mindset that they don't take the time to actually read and digest what the current presidential nominees' plans are.

[Jeff C.]

Sure Rod. Both sides are wanting to share the wealth, the difference is that McCain wants to continue the Bush policy of taking from the poor and middle class to give to the rich.

Here's a thought Rod, when Obama is elected and you get your tax break, why don't you take that extra money and give it to a rich oil company since you seem to think that they need to keep more of their money.

[Dan McKenzie]

Sounds like the Bailout that was just passed.

The only differences between McCain and Obama are Obama actually has a plan that might "change" things, McCain's plan is to allow guy's like Karl Rove to drag this election to the gutter.

What I don't get about the Republican party, why all the anger?

[Rod Martin]

You guys can sure jump along way. You compare a simple story or account with some of the strangest things.

Bottom line this is a simple way of showing the old Robin Hood Tale, Steal from the rich and give to the poor.

Jeff C. For you how much profit do the oil companies make? and what would be obsene?

For you Dan I didnt like the bailout. and am not angy but I would like to keep my money, After all in the last 25 years I have avraged over 80 hr. work weeks My best was 168. Shouldnt I be able to keep what was earned by throwing away My health.

the person yours I could not make sence of. The post simply says if you earn it , you should be able to keep it, nothing less, nothing more.Doesnt matter who you are, or if you make billions or thousands ,you should be able to keep what you make minus some basic taxes to run the country, not bail out every down and out company or person.

Fish What can I say your post just throws mud. This post is simply trying to simplify a part of this and everyother election for the last forever. class warfare demonise the rich and pander to a group of people that have grown to think they have a right to money THEY have not earned.



Now all of you. Tell me which poor you want me to give MY money to and how much. I have Trucks that need washing, a yard that can be cleaned, dirt that can be dug up and moved 20yards today and moved back tomorrow. And for to disabled I have tools that could be repaired and cleaned that do not require alot of effort. BUT do require a least some.

If you are going to give away money require something back . Start a works program, America should have the cleanest roads in the world, With the money you guys want to give away, there should not be any job [that does not require skill] undone the this great country of ours.

[Rough Thumb]

So, by comparing Obama's proposed tax policy to this story, they're saying that a construction worker, coal miner, truck driver, or teacher who earns $35K a year, did not REALLY earn their money? Money is only really deserved if it is earned by someone with an MBA or PhD or law degree who has a house in the Hamptons and a well-diversified portfolio?

It is pretty clear... using your example: the coal miner earned his 35k, not part of the PhD's 100k.

But I guess that is not fair, right?

[Rod Martin]

Rough Thumb, you picked the part I really did'nt understand.


Everybody earned their own money in his example. Does [the person] want a coal miner to make the same as a Doctor, I just did not get it

Maybe we could take all the money earned in the U.S.A. and devide by # of people working so each would earn the same.
If you decide to do that, let me know. I'll cut my work down to about 10 hrs. a week

If you want to include non-working people in the money getting side, also let me know I'll stop working at all. just dont change[theres that word again ] it in mid stream . If I work all those years let me enjoy the fruits of MY labor

[FishaHallic]

It's obvious the republican tactic of putting the tax burden on the middle class does not work. If it did work then the republicans would have less deficits then the dems and they don't. A graph I posted on another thread shows that deficits go up under republican rule and go down under the dems rule.

To me taxing 95% of the country more and the top 5% less does not make any sense or cents. Give 95% more money and they will spend it on goods and services that will help grow the economy

[Bass Attack]

Tell me which poor you want me to give MY money to and how much.



I don't want you to give it to anyone....If you make more than $250 K I want the government to take it in the form of higher taxes such that the poor and middleclass pay no or at least less tax, thus helping them to climb up the economic ladder....IF you are making more than 250 K, you have benefited greatly from the country and it is your patriotic duty to pay more for the good of the country, provided you do indeed love old glory and great US of A......

[CharlieS.]

Tell me which poor you want me to give MY money to and how much.



I don't want you to give it to anyone....If you make more than $250 K I want the government to take it in the form of higher taxes such that the poor and middleclass pay no or at least less tax, thus helping them to climb up the economic ladder....IF you are making more than 250 K, you have benefited greatly from the country and it is your patriotic duty to pay more for the good of the country, provided you do indeed love old glory and great US of A......

If you make more..you more than likely pay more to begin with . You purchase more ,etc,,etc .. I know many that have jobs that dont fluctuate much ,good ,nor bad times...since they dont make less ,isnt that like a raise compared to the ones that get unemployed ? Should they pay more ?No . Ive said before ,Been self employed over a dozen years now ,my company pays more than I made personally my last year of being an employee . Thats all right -no harm ,no foul . Explain to me that its Patriotic to pay more again ? I stress ,worry,stay awake at nite (sleeps over rated Ive always said anyways ) have done without ,and had good times . Nature of the beast . I give ,I get . I am more than likely more patriotic than most . But dont confuse the word politics with that word patriotism . We keep seeing that the more fortunate need to do for the less ,Good ,Its a great thing to give . I do . What has the all knowing O and his running mate gave ? Lets start there before asking for mine....

[Marty]

So, by comparing Obama's proposed tax policy to this story, they're saying that a construction worker, coal miner, truck driver, or teacher who earns $35K a year, did not REALLY earn their money? Money is only really deserved if it is earned by someone with an MBA or PhD or law degree who has a house in the Hamptons and a well-diversified portfolio?

You are acting like you are incapable of ordinary reasoning or comprehension. There was nothing in the original post comparing a hard workers to that that have a degee – there was no mention of $35K or a house in the Hamptons.

What was said, is taking from a worker and giving to someone that does not work!

[Marty]

It's obvious the republican tactic of putting the tax burden on the middle class does not work. If it did work then the republicans would have less deficits then the dems and they don't. A graph I posted on another thread shows that deficits go up under republican rule and go down under the dems rule.

To me taxing 95% of the country more and the top 5% less does not make any sense or cents. Give 95% more money and they will spend it on goods and services that will help grow the economy

Show your graph because you are only talking about two democrats (Jimmy and Billy) and both cut military spending to do it!

Also you best look at that 95% that Obama keeps talking about – he said “he would not raise taxes for them and he won’t (the congress will let President Bush Temporary tax cut elapse – that is 5% of your money). But of those 95% the number Obama keeps talking about only 45% pay taxes. The rest will receive rebates.

Why would you even mention “spend it on goods and services that will help grow the economyâ€

[Marty]

I don't want you to give it to anyone....If you make more than $250 K I want the government to take it in the form of higher taxes such that the poor and middleclass pay no or at least less tax, thus helping them to climb up the economic ladder....IF you are making more than 250 K, you have benefited greatly from the country and it is your patriotic duty to pay more for the good of the country, provided you do indeed love old glory and great US of A......

aAss Attack – again right out of the Liberal play book – Governament can do it better and make it sound patirioitic - useful idiots

[Rod Martin]

Again Fish, you miss the point. I'm not against giving out money, I am against taking money away from the person that EARNED it, and giving it to a person that doesnt earn it. Now you say give it to the Gov. so it can do something with it . Thats fine and again I dont have a problem giving if they are as frugel as I am.


I do have a problem with a person using MY money to buy votes by telling the middle class and poor hes going to give it to them.

THATS WHAT I DO NOT LIKE ABOUT OBAMA, HE DOESNT EVEN USE HIS OWN MONEY TO BRIBE PEOPLE TO VOTE FOR HIM!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Rod Martin]

Bass attack you can play the patriotic card if you want too .



You and Biden

[FishaHallic]

Again Fish, you miss the point. I'm not against giving out money, I am against taking money away from the person that EARNED it, and giving it to a person that doesnt earn it. Now you say give it to the Gov. so it can do something with it . Thats fine and again I dont have a problem giving if they are as frugel as I am.


I do have a problem with a person using MY money to buy votes by telling the middle class and poor hes going to give it to them.

THATS WHAT I DO NOT LIKE ABOUT OBAMA, HE DOESNT EVEN USE HIS OWN MONEY TO BRIBE PEOPLE TO VOTE FOR HIM!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

So I guess telling the wealthy he will cut there taxes is not a bribe. Or giving tax breaks to big business is not a bribe?

[FishaHallic]

It's obvious the republican tactic of putting the tax burden on the middle class does not work. If it did work then the republicans would have less deficits then the dems and they don't. A graph I posted on another thread shows that deficits go up under republican rule and go down under the dems rule.

To me taxing 95% of the country more and the top 5% less does not make any sense or cents. Give 95% more money and they will spend it on goods and services that will help grow the economy

Show your graph because you are only talking about two democrats (Jimmy and Billy) and both cut military spending to do it!

Also you best look at that 95% that Obama keeps talking about – he said “he would not raise taxes for them and he won’t (the congress will let President Bush Temporary tax cut elapse – that is 5% of your money). But of those 95% the number Obama keeps talking about only 45% pay taxes. The rest will receive rebates.

Why would you even mention “spend it on goods and services that will help grow the economyâ€

[Rod Martin]

is he going to take the poors money and use it to bribe the rich into voting for him? I think not I think McCain thinks that is a way to invest in the furture. weather it will help or not thats always the question.

[Marty]

Just like I said right after Jimmy and Billy! Again you Liberals are using numbers to lie with – but lets use your graph with the percentage. If your numbers are correct then Bust’s National Debt is right back up to were Ike left it – I would say that is not to bad.

We both know that is not the case! If you listed real numbers you would see the real deal where the amount of money cut in military spending accounted for Jimmy and Billy good numbers in GDP

Gross Domestic Product
GDP = consumption + gross investment + government spending + (exports − imports), or,
GDP = C + I + G + (X-M).

But how about the Gross National Product?

The Gross National Product (GNP) is the total dollar value of all final goods and services produced for consumption in society during a particular time period. Its rise or fall measures economic activity based on the labor and production output within a country. The figures used to assemble data include the manufacture of tangible goods such as cars, furniture, and bread, and the provision of services used in daily living such as education, health care, and auto repair. Intermediate services used in the production of the final product are not separated since they are reflected in the final price of the goods or service. The GNP does include allowances for depreciation and indirect business taxes such as those on sales and property.

GDP can be contrasted with gross national product (GNP, or gross national income, GNI), which the United States used in its national accounts until 1992 (I wounder what president had it removed). The difference is that GNP includes net foreign income (the current account) rather than net exports (the balance of trade). Put simply, GNP adds net foreign investment income compared to GDP. United States GDP, GNP and GNI (Gross National Income) can be compared at EconStats.

GDP is concerned with the region in which income is generated. It is the market value of all the output produced in a nation in one year. GDP focuses on where the output is produced rather than who produced it. GDP measures all, disregarding the firms' nationality.

In contrast, GNP is a measure of the value of the output produced by the "nationals" of a region. GNP focuses on who owns the production. For example, in the United States, GNP measures the value of output produced by American firms, regardless of where the firms are located. Real GNP in the year 2007 was 3.2. (that is a good numebr)

What was Jimmy and Billy GNP?

FishaHallic (Dave) companies pay big money for me to teach this and I’m giving it to you free – stick with me and vote like I do and I will save you a few bucks.

[FishaHallic]

is he going to take the poors money and use it to bribe the rich into voting for him? I think not I think McCain thinks that is a way to invest in the furture. weather it will help or not thats always the question.

I believe Obama also thinks it is the way to invest in the future and only wants whats best for this country just like McCain I hope. The only difference is we know McCains and the republicans way does not work, so why would we keep trying it.

[FishaHallic]

Just like I said right after Jimmy and Billy! Again you Liberals are using numbers to lie with – but lets use your graph with the percentage. If your numbers are correct then Bust’s National Debt is right back up to were Ike left it – I would say that is not to bad.

We both know that is not the case! If you listed real numbers you would see the real deal where the amount of money cut in military spending accounted for Jimmy and Billy good numbers in GDP

Gross Domestic Product
GDP = consumption + gross investment + government spending + (exports − imports), or,
GDP = C + I + G + (X-M).

But how about the Gross National Product?

The Gross National Product (GNP) is the total dollar value of all final goods and services produced for consumption in society during a particular time period. Its rise or fall measures economic activity based on the labor and production output within a country. The figures used to assemble data include the manufacture of tangible goods such as cars, furniture, and bread, and the provision of services used in daily living such as education, health care, and auto repair. Intermediate services used in the production of the final product are not separated since they are reflected in the final price of the goods or service. The GNP does include allowances for depreciation and indirect business taxes such as those on sales and property.

GDP can be contrasted with gross national product (GNP, or gross national income, GNI), which the United States used in its national accounts until 1992 (I wounder what president had it removed). The difference is that GNP includes net foreign income (the current account) rather than net exports (the balance of trade). Put simply, GNP adds net foreign investment income compared to GDP. United States GDP, GNP and GNI (Gross National Income) can be compared at EconStats.

GDP is concerned with the region in which income is generated. It is the market value of all the output produced in a nation in one year. GDP focuses on where the output is produced rather than who produced it. GDP measures all, disregarding the firms' nationality.

In contrast, GNP is a measure of the value of the output produced by the "nationals" of a region. GNP focuses on who owns the production. For example, in the United States, GNP measures the value of output produced by American firms, regardless of where the firms are located. Real GNP in the year 2007 was 3.2. (that is a good numebr)

What was Jimmy and Billy GNP?

FishaHallic (Dave) companies pay big money for me to teach this and I’m giving it to you free – stick with me and vote like I do and I will save you a few bucks.

You can look at it in any way you want but there is something you can't talk around. The national debt (deficit spending) goes up when republicans are in office and that shows that the republican way of cutting taxes for the rich and putting them on the middle class "DOES NOT WORK". If it did work the graph would be just the opposite, where the national debt would go up under the democrats rule and it does not happen that way.

[Marty]

You can look at it in any way you want but there is something you can't talk around. The national debt (deficit spending) goes up when republicans are in office and that shows that the republican way of cutting taxes for the rich and putting them on the middle class "DOES NOT WORK". If it did work the graph would be just the opposite, where the national debt would go up under the democrats rule and it does not happen that way.

Now answer as straightforward as you can! Do you have a mortgages, are you making car payments, do you have credit card debit? Now add it all up and if you don’t make that figure in one year then that is your Gross Domestic Product. Is it negative or positive?

Now take all of that debit and subtract your income, saving, 401K and the value of your assets, now that is your Gross National Product!

Are you seeing the light? I can make you look real bad if we just talk about your GDP.

[Bass Attack]

Bass attack you can play the patriotic card if you want too .

I might as well, after all Republicans have been using the term like a stick to hit anyone that doesn't go along with their agenda for the past 8 years....."If you don't back this illegal war you are simply un-American" That's the kind of reasoning and peer pressure that they had in Berlin during the late 30's.....

[Marty]

They were calling Berliner in the 30’s un-American?

Define illegal war?

[Marty]

In your own words not what you hear from others!

[FishaHallic]

Your talking about GDP and I am talking about national debt, I think they are different.

[Bass Attack]

*NM*

[Tobe]

Define illegal war?

I guess Bass Attack's reply "NM" means No Marty I can't.