Obama promises more than 600,000 stimulus jobs

Full story: Newsday 109,560
President Barack Obama promised Monday to deliver more than 600,000 jobs through his $787 billion stimulus plan this summer, with federal agencies pumping billions into public works projects, schools and summer youth programs. Full Story
Marge

Gloversville, NY

#114986 May 12, 2012
Obama is too busy making shur you can get What what in your butt and then get married
HancockWalter

Cheyenne, WY

#114988 May 12, 2012
like Edith said I am blown away that any one able to earn $9105 in one month on the internet. have you seen this webpage http://zapit.nu/23a
Joe II

Singapore, Singapore

#114989 May 12, 2012
Obama constantly liesd . Here is a whopper about his father.

Since: Aug 07

South Central Virginia

#114991 May 12, 2012
Teddy R wrote:
<quoted text>
More progressive liberal claptrap from a clueless tool of the Political Classes.
Once again your words reveal your inability to distinguish between THE AMERICAN PEOPLE AND OUR NATION and the PROFESSIONAL POLITICAL CLASSES in Washington that have usurped our federal government and bent it to provide themselves with personal political wealth and power.
"Giving back" to you only means handing over hard-won capital - our nation's economic seed corn - over to your political masters in Washington so they can continue to gorge themselves at the public trough, and we can watch it be squandered on more GM/Wall Street/UAW bailouts, more ObamaScares, more foolish Solyndras, and more treasonous Fast and Furious crimes. And then wonder why people have no jobs and the nation continues to slide into poverty, mediocrity, and increasing irrelevance in the world ...
That's all "giving back" means to OKB.
You can't conceive of putting your and your family's personal wealth and well-being at risk by investing in starting or growing an enterprise that provide many others with jobs and livlihoods as "giving back," can you?
You can't conceive of generating business and economic success that grows the American private economy and provides an ever-increasing standard of living for all Americans at large as "giving back," can you? In OKB's anti-corporate/anti-capitalist /neo-Luddite/socialist ideological mind, only the Great and Powerful OZ in WASHINGTON you worship can do that, right?
You can't conceive of the hundreds of billions of dollars annually of private philanthropy and giving by private foundations like the ones that scroll up the screen after every PBS program as "giving back," can you?
You can't conceive of the hundreds of billions of private and corporate giving that willingly provide your favorite social and political causes with means and a voice as "giving back," can you?
You can't conceive of the huge private endowments and private giving that makes America's crown jewels - its schools and Universities - a reality as "giving back," can you?
And you can't conceive of the hollowed-out shell of an America that will be left after your progressive political masters in Washington have sucked it dry and driven all our best and brightest talent elsewhere in the world, just as you propose.
You are a sad and clueless little progressive tool.
<quoted text>
Go back and read the specific text of your post that my "strawman" comment refers to, OKB. You know, the whiny BS about "Teddy wants to take food out of the mouths of the poor."
You should be ashamed, you pathetic partisan political hack.
Again, just GTFO.
So tell me, you indicated you were for a balanced approach, who do you suggest should pay more taxes?
Teddy R

Abu Dhabi, UAE

#114994 May 12, 2012
okboston wrote:
<quoted text>
So tell me, you indicated you were for a balanced approach, who do you suggest should pay more taxes?
We've been over this before.

Flat tax, everybody over federal poverty level income pays, no deductions, how much did you make, take 17%, send it in. One-page tax return, no more tax lawyers, tax dodge artists, and legions of IRS agents - they all have to go get real jobs.
Teddy R

Abu Dhabi, UAE

#114997 May 12, 2012
Another example of what happens when one does NOT control spending and aggressively impose auterity budgets when one cannot pay one's bills:

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/13/us/huge-new...

“"U.S. Constitution"”

Since: Mar 09

Tea-Party

#115000 May 13, 2012
Guinness Drinker wrote:
a politician making promises ? no such thing
Gov. Timothy M. Kaine won scattered applause from Liberty University students Monday when he spoke as a surrogate for Democrat Barack Obama’s presidential campaign, but not much support for some of Obama’s positions.

A buzz rippled through students assembled for one of Liberty’s three-times-a-week convocations when Kaine called Obama “a person of strong moral values.”

After Kaine talked about Obama’s ideas for the economy and national security, he brought up “issues on which there are some concerns”— abortion and gay marriage.
Politics as usual

Huntington Station, NY

#115001 May 13, 2012
apparently Obama is now asking for another stimulus/payoff.

Obama is getting desperate and will do anything for votes, including lieing,

kicking back tax dollars to special interest groups,

paying off campaign contributors with tax dollars like with the green jobs scam,

paying off supporters with government jobs even if they are not qualified for the job,

creating race riots,

creating false war on women, or minorities,

he will do anything and say anything.

he has no moral compass whatsoever, and he is the worst president in the history of America.

i don't care what he says his stimulus is, we can all count on the fact that it will drive up debt, it will not stimulate the economy, and it will payoff his supporters.

enough is enough, November can not come fast enough.

Since: Aug 07

South Central Virginia

#115002 May 13, 2012
Teddy R wrote:
<quoted text>
We've been over this before.
Flat tax, everybody over federal poverty level income pays, no deductions, how much did you make, take 17%, send it in. One-page tax return, no more tax lawyers, tax dodge artists, and legions of IRS agents - they all have to go get real jobs.
That was not the question, who do you think should pay more taxes? Everytime I mentioned the rich you poo-poo'd the idea. If more has to be collected it has to come from somewhere, so who do you suggest?

Now, the way you tax may answer that question indirectly, but I am looking for a direct response from you.

Your reliance on a method of taxation in order to answer the question is distorting because I may not agree with your method of taxation even if it taxes the rich more.
Teddy R

Abu Dhabi, UAE

#115003 May 13, 2012
okboston wrote:
<quoted text>
That was not the question, who do you think should pay more taxes? Everytime I mentioned the rich you poo-poo'd the idea. If more has to be collected it has to come from somewhere, so who do you suggest?
Now, the way you tax may answer that question indirectly, but I am looking for a direct response from you.
Your reliance on a method of taxation in order to answer the question is distorting because I may not agree with your method of taxation even if it taxes the rich more.
You have my clear and direct answer, as far as the federal Income tax is concerned, so quit waffling and make up your mind.

It doesn't get any more clear and direct that what I've posted.

The question of taxes is properly addressed as nothing more nor less than a matter of finding the fairest and most efficient way of raising the revenue necessary to run the federal government. Period.

A simple Flat Tax with a means-tested zero-tax threshold and no looholes, deductions, complicated Credits, etc. is a progressive, objectively fair, and efficient tax that clearly meets meets this requirement.

But for you and your fellow Progressive partisan political class warrior idealogues, taxes are just another scheme - a political fight you're desperate to pick, in which there must be winners and losers that can be played off against one another for partisan political profit. The question of how the NATION benefits or loses and how well the taxpayers' scarce money is being used to deliver maximum value back to them in public goods and services with minimum wastage on pointless bureaucracy and political machinations holds no importance for you and your ilk, does it?

So your question deserves no answer from serious patriotic Americans - because it's a destructive and stupid one, typical of the professional Political Class that needs to be run out of Washington on a rail.

My answer? GTFO, partisan hack.

Since: Aug 07

South Central Virginia

#115004 May 14, 2012
Teddy R wrote:
<quoted text>
You have my clear and direct answer, as far as the federal Income tax is concerned, so quit waffling and make up your mind.
It doesn't get any more clear and direct that what I've posted.
The question of taxes is properly addressed as nothing more nor less than a matter of finding the fairest and most efficient way of raising the revenue necessary to run the federal government. Period.
A simple Flat Tax with a means-tested zero-tax threshold and no looholes, deductions, complicated Credits, etc. is a progressive, objectively fair, and efficient tax that clearly meets meets this requirement.
But for you and your fellow Progressive partisan political class warrior idealogues, taxes are just another scheme - a political fight you're desperate to pick, in which there must be winners and losers that can be played off against one another for partisan political profit. The question of how the NATION benefits or loses and how well the taxpayers' scarce money is being used to deliver maximum value back to them in public goods and services with minimum wastage on pointless bureaucracy and political machinations holds no importance for you and your ilk, does it?
So your question deserves no answer from serious patriotic Americans - because it's a destructive and stupid one, typical of the professional Political Class that needs to be run out of Washington on a rail.
My answer? GTFO, partisan hack.
Your answer translate to "I don't want to answer your question so I will not answer your question. It might embarrass me."

A "Flat" tax imposed on 100% of all income regardless of source (work, investment, inheritence, etc...) which replaces ALL taxes applied equally to business and individuals with a threshold income of no taxation might be workable.

Since: Aug 07

South Central Virginia

#115005 May 14, 2012
Teddy R wrote:
<quoted text>
You have my clear and direct answer, as far as the federal Income tax is concerned, so quit waffling and make up your mind.
It doesn't get any more clear and direct that what I've posted.
The question of taxes is properly addressed as nothing more nor less than a matter of finding the fairest and most efficient way of raising the revenue necessary to run the federal government. Period.
A simple Flat Tax with a means-tested zero-tax threshold and no looholes, deductions, complicated Credits, etc. is a progressive, objectively fair, and efficient tax that clearly meets meets this requirement.
But for you and your fellow Progressive partisan political class warrior idealogues, taxes are just another scheme - a political fight you're desperate to pick, in which there must be winners and losers that can be played off against one another for partisan political profit. The question of how the NATION benefits or loses and how well the taxpayers' scarce money is being used to deliver maximum value back to them in public goods and services with minimum wastage on pointless bureaucracy and political machinations holds no importance for you and your ilk, does it?
So your question deserves no answer from serious patriotic Americans - because it's a destructive and stupid one, typical of the professional Political Class that needs to be run out of Washington on a rail.
My answer? GTFO, partisan hack.
If corporations have rights as American citizens have rights, then they should be taxed as American citizens are taxed.
Teddy R

Abu Dhabi, UAE

#115007 May 14, 2012
okboston wrote:
<quoted text>
Your answer translate to "I don't want to answer your question so I will not answer your question. It might embarrass me."
Only thru your surgically attached progressive class warrior idiological goggles, OKB.

The rest of the American People didn't require a translation of perfectly clear English.
okboston wrote:
<quoted text>A "Flat" tax imposed on 100% of all income regardless of source (work, investment, inheritence, etc...) which replaces ALL taxes applied equally to business and individuals with a threshold income of no taxation might be workable.
Inheritance is not income (that "income" has already been taxed once when originally earned, so unfair and stupid to give the Federal Waste Monster two bites at the apple), but other than that, it appears you & I are in complete accord!

How scary is that, eh?

(OKB panics, calls the MediaMatters emergency call center for guidance, and scrambles to find some reason, however pointless, to disagree in 3 ... 2 ... 1 ...)
Teddy R

Abu Dhabi, UAE

#115009 May 14, 2012
okboston wrote:
<quoted text>
If corporations have rights as American citizens have rights, then they should be taxed as American citizens are taxed.
I'm fine with that, PROVIDED YOU AGREE THAT INCOME ONLY GETS TAXED ONCE - NO DOUBLE-DIPPING!

If you think it's fair (let's put aside whether it's SMART or not for the moment) to tax success twice - once when it's earned by people working together (as a corporation) and then AGAIN when that same after-tax corporate income is distributed to the people whose shared work, industry, enterprise, and talent produced it, please explain why you think that's fair (and bonus points if you can explain why it's SMART for the Nation to piss away even more of that scarce National seed corn on Government consumption).

Since: Aug 07

South Central Virginia

#115010 May 14, 2012
Teddy R wrote:
<quoted text>
Only thru your surgically attached progressive class warrior idiological goggles, OKB.
The rest of the American People didn't require a translation of perfectly clear English.
<quoted text>
Inheritance is not income (that "income" has already been taxed once when originally earned, so unfair and stupid to give the Federal Waste Monster two bites at the apple), but other than that, it appears you & I are in complete accord!
How scary is that, eh?
(OKB panics, calls the MediaMatters emergency call center for guidance, and scrambles to find some reason, however pointless, to disagree in 3 ... 2 ... 1 ...)
Inheritence, gifts, lotteries are all income and should be treated as such.

In the same sense that when we divest, give a gift or fail to win the lottery it is an outgo or even an expense to our net value.

First, you can not prove that the totality of an inheritence has ever been taxed. Capital gains are an excellent example.

Second, the purpose is to prevent and aristocracy from developing. Jeffersonian in its implementation.

You are much more politically aligned with the right than I am with left, but if your comparisons entertain you, by all means continue.

Since: Aug 07

South Central Virginia

#115011 May 14, 2012
Teddy R wrote:
<quoted text>
Only thru your surgically attached progressive class warrior idiological goggles, OKB.
The rest of the American People didn't require a translation of perfectly clear English.
<quoted text>
Inheritance is not income (that "income" has already been taxed once when originally earned, so unfair and stupid to give the Federal Waste Monster two bites at the apple), but other than that, it appears you & I are in complete accord!
How scary is that, eh?
(OKB panics, calls the MediaMatters emergency call center for guidance, and scrambles to find some reason, however pointless, to disagree in 3 ... 2 ... 1 ...)
So you agree that corporations should be taxed as individuals as I stated? That would put a lawyers out of business.

Since: Aug 07

South Central Virginia

#115012 May 14, 2012
Teddy R wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm fine with that, PROVIDED YOU AGREE THAT INCOME ONLY GETS TAXED ONCE - NO DOUBLE-DIPPING!
If you think it's fair (let's put aside whether it's SMART or not for the moment) to tax success twice - once when it's earned by people working together (as a corporation) and then AGAIN when that same after-tax corporate income is distributed to the people whose shared work, industry, enterprise, and talent produced it, please explain why you think that's fair (and bonus points if you can explain why it's SMART for the Nation to piss away even more of that scarce National seed corn on Government consumption).
I agree that each entity that is taxed should pay tax on income only once. However, what you are referring to with inheritences is that the item, not the individual only get taxed once. That is a completely different context than what is normally inferred.

As an example, I make $1000.00. I pay taxes on it and invest $200 of what is left. Two years later I cash in the investment and get my original $200 back plus another $200. I pay capital gains on the additional $200 but not my original $200.

Now you stated that if my heirs were to inherit the $400 they should pay no taxes. First, they never paid one dime of tax on any of it. Second, no one has paid a dime on the $200 of capital gains.

Suppose we owned a business together. You earn money, pay taxes on it, and save some. Eventually you start your own business with the money you saved. 20 years later you sell it for a profit. You owe capital gains on what the value increased over what you paid.

Again, your worthless kids who never worked a day in their lives inherit it instead and you say they should owe no taxes.

Explain your inconsistencies.

Since: Aug 07

South Central Virginia

#115013 May 14, 2012
Teddy R wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm fine with that, PROVIDED YOU AGREE THAT INCOME ONLY GETS TAXED ONCE - NO DOUBLE-DIPPING!
If you think it's fair (let's put aside whether it's SMART or not for the moment) to tax success twice - once when it's earned by people working together (as a corporation) and then AGAIN when that same after-tax corporate income is distributed to the people whose shared work, industry, enterprise, and talent produced it, please explain why you think that's fair (and bonus points if you can explain why it's SMART for the Nation to piss away even more of that scarce National seed corn on Government consumption).
I see, so you think if I work for XYZ Corp, and they pay taxes on what they make then I should owe no taxes on what they pay me, right?
Teddy R

Abu Dhabi, UAE

#115014 May 14, 2012
okboston wrote:
<quoted text>
Inheritence, gifts, lotteries are all income and should be treated as such.
In the same sense that when we divest, give a gift or fail to win the lottery it is an outgo or even an expense to our net value.
First, you can not prove that the totality of an inheritence has ever been taxed. Capital gains are an excellent example.
Second, the purpose is to prevent and aristocracy from developing. Jeffersonian in its implementation.
You are much more politically aligned with the right than I am with left, but if your comparisons entertain you, by all means continue.
"Right" and "Left" are mere labels, much beloved of political hacks unable to muster arguments based upon facts and reason.

The Jeffersonian objection you refer to was against European primogeniture laws of inheritance of POLITICAL power, hereditary seats in Parliament, etc. Your twisted invocation of this to justify confiscation of private property is disingenuous.

You really need to get over your obsession with "inheritance" as "income." It's a moot point - as a practical matter, private wealth today never passes to individuals as what you erroneously call "income" anyway - it remains in Trusts, so as never to be subject to taxation. Give it up.
Teddy R

Abu Dhabi, UAE

#115015 May 14, 2012
okboston wrote:
<quoted text>
So you agree that corporations should be taxed as individuals as I stated? That would put a lawyers out of business.
They already are.

They already have to file corporate tax returns and pay taxes - just as individuals do.

So what's your problem?

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

York Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
York-area residents recall moments of racism (Jan '10) Feb 21 colorblind 38
Review: D & M Auto Sales (Jul '14) Feb 14 just so you know 8
Girls looking to hook up in York? Feb 13 leroyjankins11 1
Brian Williams suspended for it, but everybody ... Feb 13 Robot High School 13
Review: Complete Construction & Maint Inc Feb 8 Dan Brinkman 1
Rambler, Former Wrightsville Mayor, takes case ... (May '11) Feb 3 Yorkguy 16
Jordan says its ambassador will return to Israe... Feb 2 USA Today 1

Winter Storm Warning for York County was issued at March 04 at 1:46PM EST

York Dating
Find my Match
More from around the web

York People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]

NFL Latest News

Updated 9:42 am PST

Bleacher Report 9:42AM
Cruz Will Be at OTAs, Won't Participate
Bleacher Report 9:58 AM
Kelly Adds 9th Ducks Player to Eagles Roster
Bleacher Report10:49 AM
Can Eagles Still Deal for Marcus Mariota in Draft Without McCoy as Trade Bait?
Bleacher Report11:00 AM
2015 NFL Mock Draft: Predictions for 1st-Round Prospects Ahead of Free Agency
Yahoo! Sports12:00 PM
Here's why the Philadelphia Eagles won the big LeSean McCoy trade