Personal Wealth Up $26 Trillion Under Obama

[bripat9643]

Why would we want to do that.....
You have gone on and on about how bad things are that we need to do certain things to make the country better.
But your guy is in charge .....
It's bad under Obama
So we need 6 more years of Obama.

How can conservatives pass up $52 trillion of trickle down?

OBAMA 2016!

You bet,

I am sure there is another union that would like to fleece the American Public.

If we had stronger unions, more of that $26 trillion would have ended up in the hands of the workers

No it wouldn't, knucklehead. Union gains are made at the expense of other workers

Our workers have suffered since unions lost their influence

Both union and nonunion workers. Stagnant wages, lost benefits, no job security......thanks Republicans

post hoc, ergo propter hoc. Your argument is a logical fallacy.

 

[bripat9643]

If homeowners value of their homes has gone up and portfolios are up....
They have not "cashed in" and gained anything until they sell their home or sold their assets....
So what exactly should they be taxed on.
They should be taxed now? Because their house is worth more and their stocks have increased in value....
With homes worth more their property taxes go up but now you feel that they need to have money taken from them
to give to those who don't own homes.

Who is pocketing anything?

Capital gains?

Let's start by taxing capital gains at the same rate as earned income

Why s&ould we do that?

Because shifting money around for profit should not be taxed at a lower rate than sweating for the money

You mean investors placing money that has already been taxed once at risk should have a large chunk of their life savings confiscated?

 

[Youch]

Household wealth rises 1.7 to record level

Personal wealth which had dropped $13.2 trillion under former president Bush has increased $26 trillion under the Obama administration to a record $81.5 trillion

So is welfare and dependency.

Wanna discuss?

Yes...lets do it

You speak of personal wealth increasing.....but it is not increasing for the majority, as it has historically done generation after generation. If your point is that the rich are getting richer, well of course, but that does not make the poor poorer. To understand the above chart, one would have to understand the various "U" categories that get spun but the federal spinmeisters to promote whatever the current agenda is. Unemployment is sky-rocketing, and welfare recipients are sky-rocketing (the 47% that Romney spoke of that the Libs took advantage of which singularly got Obama re-elected because, after all, that 47% of non-tax paying moochers are bought and paid for voters, right?! Of course!). So, this focus on the federally-subsidized stock market that makes the rich (of both parties) richer, MISSES THE POINT of benefical and sustainable economics. Yes, crony-capitalism is bad, on both sides. But the liberal welfare state is killing our strength and freedom. Do I really need to post more charts? I will, but I usually find that people are not interested in learning.

 

[Rozman]

If homeowners value of their homes has gone up and portfolios are up....
They have not "cashed in" and gained anything until they sell their home or sold their assets....
So what exactly should they be taxed on.
They should be taxed now? Because their house is worth more and their stocks have increased in value....
With homes worth more their property taxes go up but now you feel that they need to have money taken from them
to give to those who don't own homes.

Who is pocketing anything?

Capital gains?

Let's start by taxing capital gains at the same rate as earned income

It's fine you want to tax money invested that has already been taxed.Capital gains...
now you really want to stick it people and tax it as income tax...

You guys would tax the air we breathe if you could find a way to pull it off.

 

[Freewill]

$26 trillion in just under six years

Imagine if we could have six more years of Obama?

Why would we want to do that.....
You have gone on and on about how bad things are that we need to do certain things to make the country better.
But your guy is in charge .....
It's bad under Obama
So we need 6 more years of Obama.

How can conservatives pass up $52 trillion of trickle down?

OBAMA 2016!

You bet,

I am sure there is another union that would like to fleece the American Public.

If we had stronger unions, more of that $26 trillion would have ended up in the hands of the workers

So who are you blaming for the Unions losing membership? Unions?

 

[Freewill]

Household wealth rises 1.7 to record level

Personal wealth which had dropped $13.2 trillion under former president Bush has increased $26 trillion under the Obama administration to a record $81.5 trillion

So is welfare and dependency.

Wanna discuss?

Yes...lets do it

You speak of personal wealth increasing.....but it is not increasing for the majority, as it has historically done generation after generation. If your point is that the rich are getting richer, well of course, but that does not make the poor poorer. To understand the above chart, one would have to understand the various "U" categories that get spun but the federal spinmeisters to promote whatever the current agenda is. Unemployment is sky-rocketing, and welfare recipients are sky-rocketing (the 47% that Romney spoke of that the Libs took advantage of which singularly got Obama re-elected because, after all, that 47% of non-tax paying moochers are bought and paid for voters, right?! Of course!). So, this focus on the federally-subsidized stock market that makes the rich (of both parties) richer, MISSES THE POINT of benefical and sustainable economics. Yes, crony-capitalism is bad, on both sides. But the liberal welfare state is killing our strength and freedom. Do I really need to post more charts? I will, but I usually find that people are not interested in learning.

Its an Obama world. Open the boarders. Send jobs overseas. Then bitch about income inequality.

Unfit for
Work
The startling rise of disability in America

In the past three decades, the number of Americans who are on disability has skyrocketed. The rise has come even as medical advances have allowed many more people to remain on the job, and new laws have banned workplace discrimination against the disabled. Every month, 14 million people now get a disability check from the government.

 

[Freewill]

$26 trillion in just under six years

Imagine if we could have six more years of Obama?

Good that you root for the 1 percent.

I can't imagine the inflation rate if Obama printed any more money.

 

[Freewill]

If homeowners value of their homes has gone up and portfolios are up....
They have not "cashed in" and gained anything until they sell their home or sold their assets....
So what exactly should they be taxed on.
They should be taxed now? Because their house is worth more and their stocks have increased in value....
With homes worth more their property taxes go up but now you feel that they need to have money taken from them
to give to those who don't own homes.

Who is pocketing anything?

Capital gains?

Let's start by taxing capital gains at the same rate as earned income

It's fine you want to tax money invested that has already been taxed.Capital gains...
now you really want to stick it people and tax it as income tax...

You guys would tax the air we breathe if you could find a way to pull it off.

Carbon credits, tax the air we breath.

 

[Freewill]

Here from the article that RW is bragging about. As usual the left wing is concerned for the rich, the richer the better.

But the wealth gains are flowing mainly to affluent Americans. Broad stock market averages have jumped more than 150% from their trough in the spring of 2009. But roughly 10% of households own about 80% of stocks.

Middle-income Americans rely mainly on home equity to build wealth, and housing prices nationwide are still below their 2006 peak. (2006 was an democrat artificial bubble, my words)

A separate Fed report released last week illustrates the gap: Median household net worth at the end of last year was $81,200, a drop of 2% from 2010. The median is the halfway point between the highest and lowest figure.

 

[rightwinger]

If homeowners value of their homes has gone up and portfolios are up....
They have not "cashed in" and gained anything until they sell their home or sold their assets....
So what exactly should they be taxed on.
They should be taxed now? Because their house is worth more and their stocks have increased in value....
With homes worth more their property taxes go up but now you feel that they need to have money taken from them
to give to those who don't own homes.

Who is pocketing anything?

Capital gains?

Let's start by taxing capital gains at the same rate as earned income

Why s&ould we do that?

Because shifting money around for profit should not be taxed at a lower rate than sweating for the money

You mean investors placing money that has already been taxed once at risk should have a large chunk of their life savings confiscated?

It has not been taxed.......that is why they call it Capital GAIN

 

[rightwinger]

Here from the article that RW is bragging about. As usual the left wing is concerned for the rich, the richer the better.

But the wealth gains are flowing mainly to affluent Americans. Broad stock market averages have jumped more than 150% from their trough in the spring of 2009. But roughly 10% of households own about 80% of stocks.

Middle-income Americans rely mainly on home equity to build wealth, and housing prices nationwide are still below their 2006 peak. (2006 was an democrat artificial bubble, my words)

A separate Fed report released last week illustrates the gap: Median household net worth at the end of last year was $81,200, a drop of 2% from 2010. The median is the halfway point between the highest and lowest figure.

Mostly among the affluent?

What shall we do? What shall we do?

Maybe stop whining that we can't afford to raise salaries and benefits for the workers

 

[rightwinger]

$26 trillion in just under six years

Imagine if we could have six more years of Obama?

Why would we want to do that.....
You have gone on and on about how bad things are that we need to do certain things to make the country better.
But your guy is in charge .....
It's bad under Obama
So we need 6 more years of Obama.

How can conservatives pass up $52 trillion of trickle down?

OBAMA 2016!

You bet,

I am sure there is another union that would like to fleece the American Public.

If we had stronger unions, more of that $26 trillion would have ended up in the hands of the workers

So who are you blaming for the Unions losing membership? Unions?

Right to work laws and a high unemployment rate

 

[Freewill]

Why would we want to do that.....
You have gone on and on about how bad things are that we need to do certain things to make the country better.
But your guy is in charge .....
It's bad under Obama
So we need 6 more years of Obama.

How can conservatives pass up $52 trillion of trickle down?

OBAMA 2016!

You bet,

I am sure there is another union that would like to fleece the American Public.

If we had stronger unions, more of that $26 trillion would have ended up in the hands of the workers

So who are you blaming for the Unions losing membership? Unions?

Right to work laws and a high unemployment rate

So, when given the choice, and people make that choice you say that is wrong? Jake, why do you so hate freedom? If Unions offered a good alternative people would flock to them willingly. Why don't they? If Unions were good for a company to make money why don't Unions grow? The percentage of Unions workers, that are working, is dropping, unemployment has nothing to do with it.

 

[Freewill]

Here from the article that RW is bragging about. As usual the left wing is concerned for the rich, the richer the better.

But the wealth gains are flowing mainly to affluent Americans. Broad stock market averages have jumped more than 150% from their trough in the spring of 2009. But roughly 10% of households own about 80% of stocks.

Middle-income Americans rely mainly on home equity to build wealth, and housing prices nationwide are still below their 2006 peak. (2006 was an democrat artificial bubble, my words)

A separate Fed report released last week illustrates the gap: Median household net worth at the end of last year was $81,200, a drop of 2% from 2010. The median is the halfway point between the highest and lowest figure.

Mostly among the affluent?

What shall we do? What shall we do?

Maybe stop whining that we can't afford to raise salaries and benefits for the workers

So the people should Unionize and get themselves better wages, if earned.

So the people should improve their lot in life by learning a useful trade or up grading the one they have then they can demand more money.

I have seldom if ever seen where sitting and whining helped anyone.

 

[rightwinger]

How can conservatives pass up $52 trillion of trickle down?

OBAMA 2016!

You bet,

I am sure there is another union that would like to fleece the American Public.

If we had stronger unions, more of that $26 trillion would have ended up in the hands of the workers

No it wouldn't, knucklehead. Union gains are made at the expense of other workers

Our workers have suffered since unions lost their influence

Both union and nonunion workers. Stagnant wages, lost benefits, no job security......thanks Republicans

post hoc, ergo propter hoc. Your argument is a logical fallacy.

domo arigato Mr Roboto

Your argument is a pretentious meme based on a High School logic class

 

[Redfish]

If homeowners value of their homes has gone up and portfolios are up....
They have not "cashed in" and gained anything until they sell their home or sold their assets....
So what exactly should they be taxed on.
They should be taxed now? Because their house is worth more and their stocks have increased in value....
With homes worth more their property taxes go up but now you feel that they need to have money taken from them
to give to those who don't own homes.

Who is pocketing anything?

Capital gains?

Let's start by taxing capital gains at the same rate as earned income

Why s&ould we do that?

Because shifting money around for profit should not be taxed at a lower rate than sweating for the money

You mean investors placing money that has already been taxed once at risk should have a large chunk of their life savings confiscated?

It has not been taxed.......that is why they call it Capital GAIN

If it wasn't taken by taxation, it would be spent in the economy. which helps the economy more, government spending or consumer spending?

please try to think before answering.

 

[Redfish]

Why would we want to do that.....
You have gone on and on about how bad things are that we need to do certain things to make the country better.
But your guy is in charge .....
It's bad under Obama
So we need 6 more years of Obama.

How can conservatives pass up $52 trillion of trickle down?

OBAMA 2016!

You bet,

I am sure there is another union that would like to fleece the American Public.

If we had stronger unions, more of that $26 trillion would have ended up in the hands of the workers

So who are you blaming for the Unions losing membership? Unions?

Right to work laws and a high unemployment rate

The non-union car factories in the south are doing very well. the employees get good pay, good benefits, and a safe work environment. Thats why they reject the UAW every time.

 

[rightwinger]

Capital gains?

Let's start by taxing capital gains at the same rate as earned income

Why s&ould we do that?

Because shifting money around for profit should not be taxed at a lower rate than sweating for the money

You mean investors placing money that has already been taxed once at risk should have a large chunk of their life savings confiscated?

It has not been taxed.......that is why they call it Capital GAIN

If it wasn't taken by taxation, it would be spent in the economy. which helps the economy more, government spending or consumer spending?

please try to think before answering.

Keep those supply side fantasies coming

 

[Redfish]

Why s&ould we do that?

Because shifting money around for profit should not be taxed at a lower rate than sweating for the money

You mean investors placing money that has already been taxed once at risk should have a large chunk of their life savings confiscated?

It has not been taxed.......that is why they call it Capital GAIN

If it wasn't taken by taxation, it would be spent in the economy. which helps the economy more, government spending or consumer spending?

please try to think before answering.

Keep those supply side fantasies coming

its fact, not fantasy.

So, lets try again, Jake. Which helps the economy more, government spending or consumer spending?

 

[kaz]

Damn.....you still trying to sell that turd of an argument?
Care to point to specific democratic legislation that caused the Great Bush recession?

What a laugher you are jake. YOU blame Bush but don't name one legislation and then expect me to name one. Do you even realize that the POTUS does not propose legislation? Do you know that it is Congress that is in the regulation business? What I said was very true. The democrats were in control of Congress, they did nothing.

RW doesn't even know how the cereal gets in his bowl every morning. He just sits down and it's there.