Obongo will REQUIRE community service

[hooked4life]

good reading skills

you do understand the difference, right?

[Gadsden]

you do understand the difference, right?

I'm not sure if that's what he meant, but enlighten me. you can also enlighten me as to how it's a problem, and answer my question on page 2

[hooked4life]

wealth is how much money you have, in real terms or assets of some kind.

income is how much, typically money, you make in a given unit of time.

I could have a $billon trust fund and make 1k a month on my TA assistance.
In this case my income would put me in the lowest bracket, but I would have more wealth than ... I duno my whole school put together?

This is what you are missing. That top 10% isn't about a salary, it's about property, stocks etc. Nobody* got rich off flat income.

*hardly anyone

[Gadsden]

wealth is how much money you have, in real terms or assets of some kind.

income is how much, typically money, you make in a given unit of time.

I could have a $billon trust fund and make 1k a month on my TA assistance.
In this case my income would put me in the lowest bracket, but I would have more wealth than ... I duno my whole school put together?

This is what you are missing. That top 10% isn't about a salary, it's about property, stocks etc. Nobody* got rich off flat income.

*hardly anyone

alright, I was fairly aware of the distinction, but I think that the two are often interchanged (erroneously) and I'm not sure if most people who quote the statistic know it. I say this because he made specific reference to wages and job loss.

[madmardigan]

enlighten me. you can also enlighten me as to how it's a problem

The super rich, like a Bill Gates, don't really have a bearing on an income chart. They pull in a comparatively small income compared to their wealth that comes through other sources that isn't counted as income. Like capital gains from all his stock options.

Likewise, heirs and the like who don't work but are worth billions, are not counted in an income chart because they aren't making an income. Yet they still have great wealth.

A distribution of wealth chart, not a distribution of income chart, will show a 90/10 split.

[gotDOMS]

obongo from congo

[hooked4life]

alright, I was fairly aware of the distinction, but I think that the two are often interchanged (erroneously) and I'm not sure if most people who quote the statistic know it. I say this because he made specific reference to wages and job loss.

I'm sort of tired after writing all day and not going to find it, but that 10% having 90% of America's wealth is something that is pretty well established.

You might be right, many people might not be aware of the distinction. But to answer your question on page 2, if things like schools, roads and the ability of the average AMERICAN (the greatest nation in the world) to have access to a fckin' doctor is all going out the window, who do you think should be footing the bill? I got to say I think the people with 90% of our money should be footing ... I duno 90%?

[xspasmx]

The Obama Administration will call on Americans to serve in order to meet the nation?s challenges. President-Elect Obama will expand national service programs like AmeriCorps and Peace Corps and will create a new Classroom Corps to help teachers in underserved schools, as well as a new Health Corps, Clean Energy Corps, and Veterans Corps. Obama will call on citizens of all ages to serve America, by developing a plan to require 50 hours of community service in middle school and high school and 100 hours of community service in college every year. Obama will encourage retiring Americans to serve by improving programs available for individuals over age 55, while at the same time promoting youth programs such as Youth Build and Head Start.

http://www.change.gov/americaserves

I'll be damned if I'm wasting my time cleaning up ghetto ****holes

Discuss

I am not an Obama fan at all, and I do not think that requiring this is good, we live in a free coutry after all. But I have to say I have given a lot of my time doing comunity service and I am proud of it. Charity starts in the home then goes out to the comunity IMO. I would much rather give a helping hand to someone in my comunity then give my money to the governement or some crappy charity that will waste 90% of it on oversight and mismanagment.

[xspasmx]

I'm sort of tired after writing all day and not going to find it, but that 10% having 90% of America's wealth is something that is pretty well established.

You might be right, many people might not be aware of the distinction. But to answer your question on page 2, if things like schools, roads and the ability of the average AMERICAN (the greatest nation in the world) to have access to a fckin' doctor is all going out the window, who do you think should be footing the bill? I got to say I think the people with 90% of our money should be footing ... I duno 90%?

They actually give more then that. The top 10% of the richest people in this country do have 90% of the wealth. They alone also fund 98% of our fedral government. If you want to cut it down to 90% I would be all for that because clearly right now they are paying more then thier fair share.

[madmardigan]

alright, I was fairly aware of the distinction, but I think that the two are often interchanged (erroneously) and I'm not sure if most people who quote the statistic know it. I say this because he made specific reference to wages and job loss.

Yes. Over the past fifty years, the vast majority of Americans have seen their wages (or more specifically, their standard of living) dropping and their jobs being lost.

And yet lo and behold, tax cuts for the rich (ie Reaganomics / Trickle -Down) has not created all these jobs and wondrous, florishing economy. Instead, a vast majority of Americans are flat on their faces biting a pillow and taking it up the ass.

[hooked4life]

They actually give more then that. The top 10% of the richest people in this country do have 90% of the wealth. They alone also fund 98% of our fedral government. If you want to cut it down to 90% I would be all for that because clearly right now they are paying more then thier fair share.

source?

[xspasmx]

Yes. Over the past fifty years, the vast majority of Americans have seen their wages (or more specifically, their standard of living) dropping and their jobs being lost.

And yet lo and behold, tax cuts for the rich (ie Reaganomics / Trickle -Down) has not created all these jobs and wondrous, florishing economy. Instead, a vast majority of Americans are flat on their faces biting a pillow and taking it up the ass.

Did you know right now half the country does not even pay taxes. The bottom 50% of earners do not pay a dime. I am not in favor of tax cuts for the rich. But honestly who is. The only people I ever seriously talk about tax cuts for the rich are piss off liberals. Bush did not cut taxes for the rich. Clinton did not cut taxes for the rich. When were taxes ever cut for the rich?
In the last 50 years taxes have gone up for EVERYONE repeatedly. Ever think maybe that is why our economy is in the toilet?

[xspasmx]

source?

Unfortunately I have better things to do tonight then spend the night digging through the internet for a link. However if you are really interested I would encourage you to look into it. I guarantee you I am right. I suggest that you check some government websites. If I remember correctly I was first taught this in lower division macro economics and we confirmed it by going to some government website that showed a breakdown of demographics with relation to earnings and taxes paid.

BTW it is lame to say what you think and then when someone else disagrees you always say 'source'. I have seen you do this a few times but I have never seen you post a source along with your opinions. Maybe you should hold yourself to your own standards.

[clayu86]

so get a GED :P

Awww did you see one of your fuk buddies down there and get offended. Get a life you communist liberal retard.

[madmardigan]

But honestly who is. The only people I ever seriously talk about tax cuts for the rich are piss off liberals. Bush did not cut taxes for the rich. Clinton did not cut taxes for the rich. When were taxes ever cut for the rich?

I swear, I must live in Bizarro world sometimes.

To answer your questions.

Tax cuts for the rich has never been a "piss off liberal" statement. Tax cuts for the rich have been one of the main pillars of Reaganomics and the neo-conservative movement.

Both H.W. Bush and W. Bush cut taxes for the rich.

Google Bush tax cut rich for a litany of links.

Reagan cut taxes for the rich as that was one of the main ideologies of his trickle-down economic theory.

So as to when...

1980 - 1992
2000 - 2008

You right with Clinton, he didn't cut taxes for the rich. He raised them.

[yoj]

How is 50 hours of community service a big deal? Thats part of graduating in Canada... its just part of your "Career and Personal Planning" class or whatever they happen to call it. Although we don't have to do quite that much... I really don't see how its frightening. I think some volunteer work is mandatory in all of Canada to graduate. Its just part of the curriculum.

[hooked4life]

Unfortunately I have better things to do tonight then spend the night digging through the internet for a link. However if you are really interested I would encourage you to look into it. I guarantee you I am right. I suggest that you check some government websites. If I remember correctly I was first taught this in lower division macro economics and we confirmed it by going to some government website that showed a breakdown of demographics with relation to earnings and taxes paid.

BTW it is lame to say what you think and then when someone else disagrees you always say 'source'. I have seen you do this a few times but I have never seen you post a source along with your opinions. Maybe you should hold yourself to your own standards.

asking for a source is lame? ohhh - woo. ok. It was kind of a trick question, because such a source atm, sadly, really doesn't exist. In truth very little is actually known about raw wealth/tax ratios. This. http://www.faculty.fairfield.edu/fac...ome&wealth.htm is a power point from a NYU econ class, 2004. Since then wealth concentration has gone up a lot. I direct you to

"Can you think of any reason for the much greater inequality in wealth than in income?

What do we tax more in the US: wealth (assets) or income?

Think of all kinds of "income" taxes that exist -- federal, state, and (in some cases) local. Think of the very few kinds of assets that are taxed: property taxes, in some states taxes on the value of cars. If you own considerable assets do you have a reason to keep them in forms that will not be taxed? "

[Saku39]

imagine how many hours a year I spend on this ****ing forum.....

There is a huge group of people like you, who just don't get it. Maybe this is what Arnold meant when he said certain types of people *need* a leader to tell them what to do.

[jannek]

Did you know right now half the country does not even pay taxes. The bottom 50% of earners do not pay a dime. I am not in favor of tax cuts for the rich. But honestly who is. The only people I ever seriously talk about tax cuts for the rich are piss off liberals. Bush did not cut taxes for the rich. Clinton did not cut taxes for the rich. When were taxes ever cut for the rich?
In the last 50 years taxes have gone up for EVERYONE repeatedly. Ever think maybe that is why our economy is in the toilet?

llol canadians pay double the tax americans do yet their economy is strong and have better health care and education then americans...u fail sir

[Trans_Isomer]

Yes! Forced labor by Emperor Obama!

[Saku39]

llol canadians pay double the tax americans do yet their economy is strong and have better health care and education then americans...u fail sir

Canadians pay 70% tax? You make trading your Freedom for Government services not sound very appealing

[jannek]

Canadians pay 70% tax? You make trading your Freedom for Government services not sound very appealing

we have free health care, university education costs a fraction of what it is in the states, economy is strong. Yes we get raped by taxes but its fro the good of canada.

[MoonWalker0]

forced labour... sounds very Sovietish

all we need are some labour camps and we'll be there!

[Dr CROHN]

The Obama Administration will call on Americans to serve in order to meet the nation?s challenges. President-Elect Obama will expand national service programs like AmeriCorps and Peace Corps and will create a new Classroom Corps to help teachers in underserved schools, as well as a new Health Corps, Clean Energy Corps, and Veterans Corps. Obama will call on citizens of all ages to serve America, by developing a plan to require 50 hours of community service in middle school and high school and 100 hours of community service in college every year. Obama will encourage retiring Americans to serve by improving programs available for individuals over age 55, while at the same time promoting youth programs such as Youth Build and Head Start.

http://www.change.gov/americaserves

I'll be damned if I'm wasting my time cleaning up ghetto ****holes

Discuss

Sounds like the Sonderkommando. People employed against their will to clean up the **** caused by the people killing them off. Granted, the Nazi administration caused the mess deliberately and made a provision for the Sonderkommando - sounds like Nobama may try the same.

Hold onto your butts, the US is in for a huge shock - voting with your heart instead of your head results in failure, just ask any Australian who voted for Kevin Rudd....

[OatsandSteak]

This is actually a little creepy.

Take the 100 hours of mandatory(volunteer?) community service, add a touch of patriotic statements, e.g. "WHAT? you wouldn't put in 100 hours of community service to help your community? That's pathetic". Give it a sprinkle of a broad but endearing word like "Change" and you got yourself some sort of weird cult.


JK GUYS!

[NuggzTheNinja]

The Obama Administration will call on Americans to serve in order to meet the nation?s challenges. President-Elect Obama will expand national service programs like AmeriCorps and Peace Corps and will create a new Classroom Corps to help teachers in underserved schools, as well as a new Health Corps, Clean Energy Corps, and Veterans Corps. Obama will call on citizens of all ages to serve America, by developing a plan to require 50 hours of community service in middle school and high school and 100 hours of community service in college every year. Obama will encourage retiring Americans to serve by improving programs available for individuals over age 55, while at the same time promoting youth programs such as Youth Build and Head Start.

http://www.change.gov/americaserves

I'll be damned if I'm wasting my time cleaning up ghetto ****holes

Discuss

That blowhard Commie can go f-ck himself. Over my dead body am I, or anybody in my family, doing community service for him.

[MisterChase]

That blowhard Commie can go f-ck himself. Over my dead body am I, or anybody in my family, doing community service for him.

Yeah, screw the communities we live in. That's what I call "family values".

[NuggzTheNinja]

Yeah, screw the communities we live in. That's what I call "family values".

FORCED community service? F-ck that.

If someone from my community wants my help with something, they can come and ask me. And I volunteer VOLUNTARILY every year.

He wants to force people to volunteer. You don't see the difference?

[FIVE OAKES]

Pointless thread is pointless.


It's not gonna happen.

[jay81]

What about his domestic paramilitary security force idea?