^Don't hate. Articulate.

*news
*equality

Adding video to channels (Equality, News) - requested by NetRunner.

>> ^bobknight33:

This guy is good.
He can fool so many people.
One thing I don't know is that is he that smart or are the people who buy into this are stupid?


I think stupid are those run are for not stupid does former running!

...yeah, so why is this stupid? Or, why am I stupid for thinking this sounds reasonable?

Anyway, if you're gonna call someone else stupid, then work on your grammar first.

"One thing I don't know is that is he that smart or are the people who buy into this are stupid?"

Try...One thing I don't know: Is he that smart, or are the people who buy into this that stupid?

PORKCHOP SANDWICHES!
>> ^bobknight33:

One thing I don't know is that is he that smart or are the people who buy into this are stupid?

Nice speech, now do something about it.

>> ^dystopianfuturetoday:

PORKCHOP SANDWICHES!


aaAaaAa!! get the fuck out!

It's not stupid, at all, to think this is great policy. Unfortunately however, bobknight33 is spot on here because Obama knows this will never pass such an utterly bought Congress. This is merely Campaign Obama getting to sound progressive for his re-election, knowing that in reality he'll never have to betray his donors.

>> ^bobknight33:

This guy is good.
He can fool so many people.
One thing I don't know is that is he that smart or are the people who buy into this are stupid?


I feel stupider after trying to read that

Why has there only been one civil war in American history?

>> ^bobknight33:

There is absolutely no way I can argue that the less-well-off should pay higher tax rates than the wealthy. So I'm going to act like it doesn't need refutation and call someone stupid. And just for fun, I'm going to use the grammar of a three-year-old.


I agree completely.

Come on guys..."trickle down" that's all bobknigghter is trying to say.

^dystopianfuturetoday:

PORKCHOP SANDWICHES!

Also, you've entirely missed the point of the sarcasm button.

GOOD DAY SIR>> ^bobknight33:

This guy is good.
He can fool so many people.
One thing I don't know is that is he that smart or are the people who buy into this are stupid?

Because both sides had money.>> ^Gallowflak:

Why has there only been one civil war in American history?

It simply isn't true.

Warren Buffett pays about 45% of his income to the gov't whereas the poorest 50% of the citizenry pays no federal taxes at all.

Obama is just a divider encouraging class warfare.

Word up, lantern. The top 1% wealthy already pay 40% of the taxes. Forcing them to pay more will weaken the economy further but snag a few more voters seeking "revenge" for perceived economic injustices.

Hasn't President Foodstamps already blown 4 trillion in fiat money with nothing to show for it? The socialists of this corrupt regime can't create a single job for less than half-a-million dollars each.


>> ^lantern53:

It simply isn't true.
Warren Buffett pays about 45% of his income to the gov't whereas the poorest 50% of the citizenry pays no federal taxes at all.
Obama is just a divider encouraging class warfare.

>> ^quantumushroom:

Word up, lantern. The top 1% wealthy already pay 40% of the taxes. Forcing them to pay more will weaken the economy further but snag a few more voters seeking "revenge" for perceived economic injustices.
Hasn't President Foodstamps already blown 4 trillion in fiat money with nothing to show for it? The socialists of this corrupt regime can't create a single job for less than half-a-million dollars each.

>> ^lantern53:
It simply isn't true.
Warren Buffett pays about 45% of his income to the gov't whereas the poorest 50% of the citizenry pays no federal taxes at all.
Obama is just a divider encouraging class warfare.



What about all the corporations that pay barely anything in Taxes? Do they not exist?

America had a huge boom when taxes were much greater on the richest citizens. Are you really prepared to argue with some of the most lauded economists in the world? Or argue history?

This isn't a matter of republican vs democrat this is a fact...you're just wrong. Period.

These "statistics" get thrown around a lot, but they don't tell the whole story.

The top 5% pays something like %50 of the taxes, but they have %90 of the money.>> ^quantumushroom:

Word up, lantern. The top 1% wealthy already pay 40% of the taxes. Forcing them to pay more will weaken the economy further but snag a few more voters seeking "revenge" for perceived economic injustices.
Hasn't President Foodstamps already blown 4 trillion in fiat money with nothing to show for it? The socialists of this corrupt regime can't create a single job for less than half-a-million dollars each.

>> ^lantern53:
It simply isn't true.
Warren Buffett pays about 45% of his income to the gov't whereas the poorest 50% of the citizenry pays no federal taxes at all.
Obama is just a divider encouraging class warfare.

>> ^bobknight33:

One thing I don't know is that is he that smart or are the people who buy into this are stupid?

This is America. Speak English or get the fuck out.

Lies, Michelle Bachman says so, but it's simply not true (and unlike Quant, I actually have evidence to back my claims http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/numbers/displayatab.cfm?Docid=2435&DocTypeID=2)

Top 1% pays 22.7% of Federal taxes and have 17% of the income. The bottom 90% pay 47.8% with 59.8% of all income. Those numbers are based on verifiable fact, not regurgitated punditry. So yes, the wealthy pay a slightly higher percentage of their income as tax, boo hoo, poor billionaires.

Second, it has been proven, time and again, 100% of the time, that tax breaks to the wealthy do not stimulate the economy nearly as much as tax breaks to the middle and lower classes. It has always been that way and I defy you to find a time and place in history when things worked differently. Middle and lower income people SPEND money, the wealthy HOARD money. It's a simple as that, hoarding does not stimulate the economy. They don't ACTUALLY spend it on job creation, that's just a myth.

Maybe you should get your 'facts' from someone other than Michelle Bachman, she's not very reliable.

>> ^quantumushroom:

Word up, lantern. The top 1% wealthy already pay 40% of the taxes. Forcing them to pay more will weaken the economy further but snag a few more voters seeking "revenge" for perceived economic injustices.
Hasn't President Foodstamps already blown 4 trillion in fiat money with nothing to show for it? The socialists of this corrupt regime can't create a single job for less than half-a-million dollars each.

>> ^lantern53:
It simply isn't true.
Warren Buffett pays about 45% of his income to the gov't whereas the poorest 50% of the citizenry pays no federal taxes at all.
Obama is just a divider encouraging class warfare.

Drachen, it sounds like your beef with the rich is that they "hoard" money rather than pump it back into the economy. Your solution, then, it to increase the capital gains tax rate (what Obama is promoting in this video)? As a hypothetical rich person, I have two options as far as what to do with my money. I can put it into a safe but low-interest bank account or I can invest in capital (stock market, real estate, etc), where on average I stand to earn a greater interest rate but where I also put my money at much greater risk. If you disincentivize the latter with an increased capital gains tax rate, you are going to divert funds from being invested into the economy toward Scrooge McDuck's swimming pool.

And in case there is any confusion, rich people are not taxed at a lower net rate than poor people on INCOME. Rich people in the U.S. pay 39.6 cents on every dollar they make in income over $250,000 after deductions, while those who make less $39,600 after deductions are taxed at 15 cents to the dollar. However, traditionally, capital gains (as opposed to income) have been taxed at 15% flat. Why should capital gains be taxed at a lower rate than income? Arguments include:

1. Investment in capital is an investment in the economy. It is encouraged with a lower capital gains tax rate.
2. Money must first be earned as income before it can be invested. Therefore it has already been taxed. Capital gains tax in essence is a taxation on already taxed money.
3. Investment is risky, bringing in a salary is not. Risk averse spenders will not take risks unless they are incentivized to do so. But it is essential to the growth of our economy that this risk be taken. Refer to point 1.

Why are capitol gains sacrosanct? It's not earned if it's been inherited and invested and reinvested. Capitol gains taxes are low now; why aren't they investing? Why aren't the banks loaning? Why was the economy humming along during the higher tax rates of the past?

Rich people's money is not more magical and productive than the rest of our money, unless we create and tolerate a system where rich people get special breaks and privileges.

I like to think that bobknight is just fucking hammered whenever he posts on videosift. It sort of makes me want to drink and sift.

>> ^ChaosEngine:

Nice speech, now do something about it.


I agree, BUT:
I think that we have unrealistic expectations about Presidents being proactive and "getting things done" in all sorts of policy areas, when the reality of the checks and balances between different branches of government makes it so they actually can't do all of these things. Congress / the legislative branch sets tax rates, so the president has little to do with it, other than veto/approval of what congress puts on his desk.

So, making a speech is pretty much the only way that he actually can "do something about it".

The fact that every single president or presidential candidate makes campaign promises about things like this that are in reality almost entirely out of their control is frustrating, but on the other hand "if I get any tax increase bills from Congress, I will most likely try to veto it unless it is attached as a rider onto some other item that I am unable to veto" doesn't make for quite as good a sound-bite as "read my lips, no new taxes" (even if it turns out that you're just flat-out lying).

To get elected, you have to make promises that you can't actually follow through on, at least not without seriously adjusting the definition of "follow through".

Top 1% pays 22.7% of Federal taxes and have 17% of the income. The bottom 90% pay 47.8% with 59.8% of all income. Those numbers are based on verifiable fact

So? Rejigger and you can say, "The bottom 75% pay 32% of the taxes with 45.7% of all income. Any way you slice it, the 'wealthy' are paying the lion's share of the taxes, with a smaller percentage of the nation's total wealth. The rich are paying their fair share and then some.

It has always been that way and I defy you to find a time and place in history when things worked differently

First things first. Your entire premise is wrong. The Bush tax cuts were not "Tax cuts for the rich". They were tax cust for EVERYONE. It is only the neoliberal spin echo-chamber, zombie brains of leftists that calls them 'tax cuts for the rich'. Any sensible, fair analysis proves conclusively that the 'rich' ended up paying an even HIGHER percentage of the tax burden after the Bush cuts. THe only way any person can possibly believe they were 'for the rich' is if they turn their brains off, become absolute simpletons, and look ONLY at the total dollars rather than at the whole picture of what happened.

You guys on the left are going to have to face some reality at some point. Any tax 'cut' is going to overwhelmingly favor 'the rich' because they are the ones paying the taxes. The poor and middle class are either paying zero taxes, or get a tax refund every year.

You neolibs aren't targeting the 'rich'. You are targeting the upper-middle class. Yeah - REAL "progessive" of you jerks to go along with Obama's marxist rhetoric and try to kneecap folks that earn a piddly 200,000 a year. Oooo - yeah - those are "rich guys" who "aren't paying their fair share". You guys are a bunch of jackhats, you know that? Those 200K a year guys are small business owners who live paycheck to paycheck just as much as the poor do.

And Obama and Buffet are total @$$es for lying to the entire country and trying to pass off capital gains as if it was the same thing as income. Really, just goes to show how much neolibs have to warp reality in order to try to sucker the stupid and the intellectually weak. It is to Videosift's complete and utter shame that it has such high percentage of dupes who are so easily manipulated by lies and class warfare rhetoric.

Class warfare is what the President is trying to mitigate, and the winning side hates it because they are greedy humans. Shame.

still white there, huh winston... whitey just saying you sound like a white guy. a devil, like me. know that anything you say is evil and will lead to the downfall of all races, son.

fun to blanket generalities see