U.S. Presidential race - Democrat Discussion

[Puremallace]

Not sure how, but somehow this is making news. Interview President Obama gave to the Iowa register. He is very straight forward and frankly blunt. He says what everyone else has been saying, since he got elected.

http://www.desmoinesregister.com/art...nclick_check=1

[Felya]

Not sure how, but somehow this is making news. Interview President Obama gave to the Iowa register. He is very straight forward and frankly blunt. He says what everyone else has been saying, since he got elected.

http://www.desmoinesregister.com/art...nclick_check=1

Romney did an interview at Koch ranch? But it wasn't Charles or David? There are more? Did someone feed the Koch bothers after midnight or got them wet?

[Reeve]

Not sure how, but somehow this is making news. Interview President Obama gave to the Iowa register. He is very straight forward and frankly blunt. He says what everyone else has been saying, since he got elected.

http://www.desmoinesregister.com/art...nclick_check=1

I think it's interesting how he says an "emphasis on our manufacturing strengths" not an "emphasis on manufacturing." I think that's the right way to think about it. We're still very strong in manufacturing, but we're weakening in the manufacturing of low skill products, which is as it should be in a country with a minimum wage as high as ours.

[Kasierith]

late to the party, and may have been mentioned, but actually Obama can.

I thought that the Marijuana Tax ACt of 1937 pretty much settled it as being illegal, making its status an aspect of legislative law? I could be wrong though... the act seems a bit odd in its application.

[Felya]

I thought that the Marijuana Tax ACt of 1937 pretty much settled it as being illegal, making its status an aspect of legislative law? I could be wrong though... the act seems a bit odd in its application.

It's more odd than you think. It's a stamp tax, where in order to buy the pot you needed to buy a stamp to pay tax on it. They made pot illigal by simply not selling the required stamp. Nixon went further by making it class 1, in fact creating the classes. Class one made it actually illigal, without stupid stamp running around.

[Masark]

I thought that the Marijuana Tax ACt of 1937 pretty much settled it as being illegal, making its status an aspect of legislative law? I could be wrong though... the act seems a bit odd in its application.

The tax act makes it illegal without really making it illegal. It's a catch-22 law.

Under the tax act, marijuana is legal if it has the appropriate tax stamp. But under the regulatory procedure for such stamps, to get the tax stamp for it, you first need to possess the marijuana, which is illegal to possess without the stamp.

[Capitalistchampion]

Democrat Party is falling appart. Most Americans see through their lies and corruption, Obama care was the straw that broke the camels back.

[Lenonis]

Democrat Party is falling appart. Most Americans see through their lies and corruption, Obama care was the straw that broke the camels back.

You really convinced me with your factual argument full of sources, figures, numbers, and logic!

[Ausr]

You really convinced me with your factual argument full of sources, figures, numbers, and logic!

He's doing the same thing in the other thread. You can pretty much ignore him since I'm sure he'll pretty much ignore whatever it is you're saying, even with proof.

[Lenonis]

He's doing the same thing in the other thread. You can pretty much ignore him since I'm sure he'll pretty much ignore whatever it is you're saying, even with proof.

But that's booooooooring.

[Ausr]

But that's booooooooring.

You can tell me what it's like talking to a wall then :P

[conscript]

You can tell me what it's like talking to a wall then :P

Its okay when the wall throws out random nonsense and gives you a chance to type out and defend your beliefs. Sometimes its good to confirm the stuff thats rattling around in your head. Plus its good practice for when you are actually telling people, not trolls, they are wrong. Its like practicing a speech to a mirror.

[Naxere]

This isn't a black and white question. And I'm tired of everyone making it out to be one.

Two scenarios:
Company A makes a modest profit while offering a reasonably priced, safe and effective product in the marketplace. They offer their employees decent wages and benefits.

Company B makes a modest profit while offering an incredibly expensive product that is a necessity for people to survive. They cut corners on safety and quality while offering as low a wage as possible and no benefits.

Are those two profits equal in the "bad thing" scale?

I was just asking a question since there seems to be a trend among the liberals in this country to demonize people/corporations for earning over a certain amount of money.
The better question should be: how much of a profit do you think is too much? Does Apple make too much money? They only made $8.8 billion dollars in profit Q3 2012.
Should they only be allowed to make $4 billion in profits per quarter?

[smelltheglove]

I was just asking a question since there seems to be a trend among the liberals in this country to demonize people/corporations for earning over a certain amount of money.
The better question should be: how much of a profit do you think is too much? Does Apple make too much money? They only made $8.8 billion dollars in profit Q3 2012.
Should they only be allowed to make $4 billion in profits per quarter?

the biggest issue comes when there is at least the appearance of collusion, especially on things that are deemed essential. take oil for example. we subsidize oil companies, the companies do not appear to actually compete, and frequently looks like pricefixing. not saying that is a fact, but the appearance is certainly there. banks are another. they actually got caught out there on the LIBOR thing, but that wasnt glamorous enough to keep the media's attention. there are any number of examples, some legit, some not.

[Wells]

I was just asking a question since there seems to be a trend among the liberals in this country to demonize people/corporations for earning over a certain amount of money.
The better question should be: how much of a profit do you think is too much? Does Apple make too much money? They only made $8.8 billion dollars in profit Q3 2012.
Should they only be allowed to make $4 billion in profits per quarter?

No one on the left is demonizing people for making over a certain amount of money. Liberals don't hate profits. We just don't think the opportunity to make a profit excuses everything or is always a productive motivator for society as a whole.

[Naxere]

...Right, because the President isn't out there in every other speech playing class warfare by demonizing "millionaires and billionaires" for not paying what he considers their fair share of taxes.

[obdigore]

...Right, because the President isn't out there in every other speech playing class warfare by demonizing "millionaires and billionaires" for not paying what he considers their fair share of taxes.

oh jesus christ this terrible rhetoric again?

[Wells]

...Right, because the President isn't out there in every other speech playing class warfare by demonizing "millionaires and billionaires" for not paying what he considers their fair share of taxes.

Saying that they need to pay their fare share, when they're paying effective tax rates lower than people making less than them in many cases, is not hating profits or demonizing people for making money.

[Kraenen]

He's doing the same thing in the other thread. You can pretty much ignore him since I'm sure he'll pretty much ignore whatever it is you're saying, even with proof.

make that especially with proof

[Chrysia]

...Right, because the President isn't out there in every other speech playing class warfare by demonizing "millionaires and billionaires" for not paying what he considers their fair share of taxes.

Millionaires and billionaires =/= the companies that make them their profits.

Millionaires and billionaires, at current, pay effective tax rates lower than lower tax bracket people.

Millionaires and billionaires control something like 90% of the money in this country, while the lower 40% of the people on the payscale control less than 5% between them. The money doesn't trickle down, ever. They're stuck living paycheck to paycheck.