USVI-On-Line

SJ,
nah, i'd rather not--the weekly standard--i guess i could counter with an article from some 'liberal media' outpost. why go there?
why bother? i'd like to say i have more important things to do (and once i pick up my kids, i will) but have been lurking here WAY too much today--so obviously i have either been shirking my duties or had nothing more important--so let'sjust agree to disagree and move on.
best...
L

DELETED

Luv you Jorge. How's Junior?

Is Sox still the demon of the forum??? Now that Joy Bahar.........that is one demonic woman.

Let's come back in a year and have this discussion and see how much better off we are. My guess is Obama will say the first 4 years were spent cleaning up Bush's mess and he needs 4 more to get things on the right track. It wouldn't surprise me if he tries to change the term limit laws and park his butt in the oval office until he dies......like the Queen mother.

I need a glass or 4 of wine. I hope I don't start drunk posting or you'll hear how I really feel.

cypressgirl wrote: My guess is Obama will say the first 4 years were spent cleaning up Bush's mess and he needs 4 more to get things on the right track.

Boy oh boy, Cyp! I'd put money on that one with you. (or is it "THAT ONE")

verjoy wrote:Luv you Jorge. How's Junior?

Who's Junior ?

Aroobagirl~

It sounds like your kids are the same gorgeous combination as Tiger Woods. They are 8 and 2 now?

Dave-

As I remember "Junior" is the name of Jorge's 29 pound orange tabby cat. He's a beauty, but was pretty sick for a while after Jorge got back from STJ.

Since no one bothered to answer my question above, I will post it again and answer it myself:

Which candidate has had personal experience in "spreading the wealth around"?

Gov. Palin instituted a windfall tax on profitable oil companies and used that money to cut checks to Alaska's voters. Unlike Obama's tax plan which would benefit industry by raising demand if it worked, Palin's redistribution was not intended to help the oil industry and did not have any impact on demand for oil. It was purely taking money from industry to give to Alaskans - i.e., redistribution of wealth in the purest sense.

So many issues have been touched upon in this long thread. Many with good points, many simply spouting rhetoric that is spoonfed by political pundants on both sides. Here are the deciding factors for my vote and my outlook on some of the issues brought up in this thread sorry for it's length.

The economy, If you want to throw the rascals out to make a change, you'd better look back more than the last 8 years and look at more than just the White House as the reason we are where we are. Yes, I am dissappointed that the people currently in office did not see this coming. My opinion is that this has been coming for more than just 8 years. How many decades has it been that consumer debt has exceeded savings or growth in the US? I do hold the leadership accountable for not derailing this trainwreck. I do not like the "bailout" of wallstreet or frivolous investors or those who have walked away from mortgage contracts because hindsight tells them that the house they bought was 3X overpriced. There should be severe reprocusions for each of these actions. I have heard the "time for a change" type campaigns before and have never seen the promised change happen. I have also seen the "throw the rascals out" type campaigns and somehow we end up with new rascals in power. I do see that only one candidate has a clear history of bi-partisan behavior. The other candidate is untested in my opinion. I was hoping for, and truly wished that the republican candidate for VP would've been a long time friend and collaborater of the pres. candidate. I think that a McCain/Liberman ticket would've been a great choice. I am not afraid to alienate the far right or left.

Redistribution of wealth vs unregulated capitalism. I do not see that redistribution of wealth contains any incentives to get off your butt and get a job. I do not see where it encourages business. Redistribution of wealth in this way is not conducive to an economic high tide. We are paying enough people not to work, enough farms not to grow, enough factories not to produce as it is. Unregulated capitalism is solution that keeps rich in power. I see a candidate promising to redistribute my wealth. I do not see anyone crying for unregulated capitalism.

Healthcare. Contrary to popular belief, no one with urgent medical need in the United States can be turned away from a hospital. Yes, Some hospitals will attempt to keep you out if you do not have insurance. It is illegal. Laws are in place to make sure that those with urgent need will find care. Myself and my wife are both in the healthcare industry and we see it on a regular basis. We see incredible wealth being grown in the insurance industry. We do not see proportional growth in the healthcare or research fields. Insurance giants never see a patient and is not in this business to heal people. I do not believe that larger government is the solution to the growing healthcare "crisis" in this country. Charitible hospitals and organizations are part of the solution. I prefer to give the 20% of my wages to whom I decide, not to whom my government decides. I prefer that my government finds a solution to the middleman of insurance.

The wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. I do not like that we are in Iraq. I do not like the reasons we are there. I do feel that if we yank our troops out of Iraq prior to fulfilling the promises we made to them would be the largest mistake we can make. We would leave a vacuum that only our enemies would attempt to fill. Iraq must be left a nation free and powerful enough to decide their own destiny. I also believe that Iraq is taking great leaps at stabilization of their own country and should be strongly encouraged to do so. Afghanistan must also be stable before we leave. Having an indefinate American military presence in the region is not appealing to me but history and common sense tells me that it will be necessary. We are still peacekeeping in Bosnia after throwing out a regime that engaged in genicide why not Iraq. I hear only one candidate taking the position that is in direct opposition to what the polls tell him that I want to hear. That tells me he believes his position to be the right one.

Race has been touched upon in this thread. I have noticed a particular trend in the media the last two weeks to ask the question "Do you know anyone who will not vote for" a particular candidate "because of his race?" I have yet to hear that question followed up with Do you know anyone who will vote for a candidate because of his race? I will cast my vote in one week for the candidates that I believe will best represent me in his or her elected position. It will not be a vote for race or gender. I take exception to the suggestion that I will do otherwise. I know the press has to sell ad time but at what cost?

Sorry bayer~

Didn't mean to ignore your post, but I was pretty sure it was a trick question.

It's a good point, but the oil companies are corporate entities not individuals that pay income tax. That makes a difference to me.

bayer40601 wrote:Since no one bothered to answer my question above, I will post it again and answer it myself:

Which candidate has had personal experience in "spreading the wealth around"?

Gov. Palin instituted a windfall tax on profitable oil companies and used that money to cut checks to Alaska's voters. Unlike Obama's tax plan which would benefit industry by raising demand if it worked, Palin's redistribution was not intended to help the oil industry and did not have any impact on demand for oil. It was purely taking money from industry to give to Alaskans - i.e., redistribution of wealth in the purest sense.

Tell me your kidding!!! How does Obama's tax plan benefit industry by raising demand? He and Biden both voted for raising taxes on anyone making more than 42,000. Is that RICH to you???? This is all crap. When BO, Biden, Palosi, Reid, and the rest of the den of theives get in power, we'll all be screwed.

As for Palin, well they did drill for oil in Alaska. Under BO's plan, he'll tax every business with more than 10 employees. Less in some cases. I'm trying to figure out it being a housewife with no income of my own qualifies me for a tax cut. I think I'll look into that. Might be my STJ fund.

So cypress, Palin taking money from the oil companies (some of which they obtained from the lower 48) and passing it out to people in Alaska doesn't seem like objectionable "spreading the wealth around"? If that's the case, then I assume that all of the talk about "spreading the wealth around" has been nothing but politics and not a serious discussion about questionable policies.

DELETED

bayer40601 wrote:So cypress, Palin taking money from the oil companies (some of which they obtained from the lower 48) and passing it out to people in Alaska doesn't seem like objectionable "spreading the wealth around"? If that's the case, then I assume that all of the talk about "spreading the wealth around" has been nothing but politics and not a serious discussion about questionable policies.

You use the term "windfall profit tax" to inject a negative conotation. I don't think that's what she called it. The state of Alaska, or the gov. of Alaska, how ever you want to look at it, owns the oil rights in that state. From what I understand, what she collected from the oil companies was mineral rights that she could have kept for the state gov., but instead, sent it back to the citizens of Alaska. I can't imagine any liberal sending any money back to any of it's citizens that it didn't first take for some other citizens.

cypress-Two points. First, Alaska leases the land to the oil companies on the front end and thereby gets payments for the leases. Second, Alaska enacted a new tax on oil company profits which brought in $6.0 billion which pushed the state's revenues to $10.0 billion this year from oil company profits and royalty payments from the leases. Thus, what Gov. Palin did was exactly the same thing Sen. Obama is proposing, tax the oil companies at a higher rate on their windfall profits, and then give the money to taxpayers in the form of tax reductions or tax rebates. It's just that when a Conservative Republican does that one isn't supposed to call it that.

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/l ... tax07.html