Anonymous wrote:

(6) Obama's proposed tax hike on ALL taxable income over $0. This is factually incorrect. Obama has said repeatedly and consistently he'd keep the lower rates in place on the first $250,000 of a married couple's income. Thus, your brackets below are fictitious.

Pre-Bush Tax Cuts / Obama's Proposal:
$0 to $25,750 = 15%
$25,750 to $62,450 = 28% + $3,862
$62,450 to $130,250 = 31% + $14,138
$130,250 to $283,150 = 36% + $35,156 $3,862.50 + 25,750
$283,150+ = 39.6% +$90,200

Bush Tax Cuts (Current Rates)
$0 to $8,500 = 10%
$8,500 to $34,500 = 15% + $850
$34,500 to $83,600 = 25% + $4,750
$83,600 to $174,400 = 28% + $17,025
$174,400 to $379,150 = 33% + $42,449
$379,150+ = 35% + $110,016

Anonymous wrote:
(1) Worst recession in U.S. history (stimuli/green packages = crap, trillions more debt) As been pointed out previously, the recession ended in 2009. The problem with the stimulus package in terms of jumpstarting job creation wasn't that it had "green" packages, it was that 45% of it was tax cuts, so it made too little of an injection into the economy. That said, most economists agree that the stimulus arrested the economic freefall and began the process of turning the U.S.S. America in the right direction. The economy is demonstrably stronger now than it was 3 years ago. The debt trajectory is completely irrelevant to discussing the short-term financial crisis that began on Bush's watch due largely to Bush's policies.

(2) Two wars that have not ended (promise to end = crap) Fair to say Iraq has been wound down in terms of U.S. involvement. I recall Obama promising to escalate Afghanistan, not end it.

(3) Wall Street unscathed after the housing/stock market meltdown Unscathed is an imprecise word. Moreover, I don't recall Obama promising to "scathe" or "punish" Wall Street. In any event, TARP has been repaid, bonuses are down, prop desk trading is done, and the credit crunch has eased. The Ted Spread is back to normal. I realize you don't know what the Ted Spread is, but that's OK if you want to Google it.

(4) Worst natural disaster in U.S. history (Obama told foreign aid to clean up to go home, continued his vacay, and months later took credit for inventing the cap - LMAO!) [/b]how sad are you that you consider the BP oil spill to be a natural disaster?

(5) Guitmo is still open for business (promise to close = crap) [b]I'll grant you that.

(6) Obama's proposed tax hike on ALL taxable income over $0 This is factually incorrect. Obama has said repeatedly and consistently he'd keep the lower rates in place on the first $250,000 of a married couple's income. Thus, your brackets below are fictitious.

Pre-Bush Tax Cuts / Obama's Proposal:
$0 to $25,750 = 15%
$25,750 to $62,450 = 28% + $3,862
$62,450 to $130,250 = 31% + $14,138
$130,250 to $283,150 = 36% + $35,156 $3,862.50 + 25,750
$283,150+ = 39.6% +$90,200

Bush Tax Cuts (Current Rates)
$0 to $8,500 = 10%
$8,500 to $34,500 = 15% + $850
$34,500 to $83,600 = 25% + $4,750
$83,600 to $174,400 = 28% + $17,025
$174,400 to $379,150 = 33% + $42,449
$379,150+ = 35% + $110,016

(7) Obamacare penalizes people for not being able to afford health insurance on their tax return (and they still don't get any insurance!!!) I have no problem with this.
Examples:

2014; family of 2; taxable income=$26,000;
penalty=$260 ($260=$26,000x1% > $190=$95x2.)

2014; family of 3; taxable income=$26,000;
penalty=$285 ($260=$26,000x1% < $285=$95x3.)

2016; family of 3; taxable income=$26,000;
penalty=$2,085 ($650=$26,000x2.5% < $2,085=$695x3.)

2016; family of 3; taxable income=$85,000;
penalty=$2,125 ($2,125=$85,000x2.5% > $2,085=$695x3.)

2016; family of 8; taxable income=$85,000;
penalty=$2,125 ($2,1t25=$85,000x2.5% > $2,085=$695x3.)

-----------------------------

I realize Facts died last week (see http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2012-04-19/news/ct-talk-huppke-obit-facts-20120419_1_facts-philosopher-opinion for the obituary), but you're really living in a fantasyland.

Anonymous wrote:Im not sure how the misquote changes the substance of the message?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Jeff,

There are some current, important issues for you I listed above. I care not to start a thread, because I can see that the contribution from most of the people on this site would be nominal if not counter-productive (e.g., probably more talk about Mitt's $$$, more talk about "Fox lies" or whatever, maybe some calling me or whoever a "racist/bigot/troll," etc. It's rather unfortunate that a site with so many lawyers is most often unable to produce anything near a true "debate" on any particular issue of importance).

If you don't care to start good topics then for crying out loud, stop complaining about seeing nothing but bad topics!

Anonymous wrote:Jeff,

There are some current, important issues for you I listed above. I care not to start a thread, because I can see that the contribution from most of the people on this site would be nominal if not counter-productive (e.g., probably more talk about Mitt's $$$, more talk about "Fox lies" or whatever, maybe some calling me or whoever a "racist/bigot/troll," etc. It's rather unfortunate that a site with so many lawyers is most often unable to produce anything near a true "debate" on any particular issue of importance).

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: And to the Latin scholar who wrote "Res Ipsa Loquitur" on one of these threads, it's "ipse".

I am not a "scholar" - I am a lawyer. We use Black's Law Dictionary, and the 6th edition says "Res ipsA loquitur."

Anonymous wrote: And to the Latin scholar who wrote "Res Ipsa Loquitur" on one of these threads, it's "ipse".

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Somehow I think Mitt will survive the insinuation that he didn't loans to get through school.

This was about education programs, not about Mitt. If you want something that was about Mitt, look at Rosen's comment complaining that Mitt gets his information about women in the economy from his wife, who is totally insulated from economic hardship; THAT was an attack on Mitt (and not on Ann). How do we let ourselves get manipulated by Fox/GOP distortions?

"Fox/GOP Distortions?"

Here is a distortion for you:

While the following is occurring in America, your attention has been deflected by the MAINSTREAM media over to things like how much $$$ Mitt and Ann have:

(1) Worst recession in U.S. history (stimuli/green packages = crap, trillions more debt)

(2) Two wars that have not ended (promise to end = crap)

(3) Wall Street unscathed after the housing/stock market meltdown

(4) Worst natural disaster in U.S. history (Obama told foreign aid to clean up to go home, continued his vacay, and months later took credit for inventing the cap - LMAO!)

(5) Guitmo is still open for business (promise to close = crap)

(6) Obama's proposed tax hike on ALL taxable income over $0

Pre-Bush Tax Cuts / Obama's Proposal:
$0 to $25,750 = 15%
$25,750 to $62,450 = 28% + $3,862
$62,450 to $130,250 = 31% + $14,138
$130,250 to $283,150 = 36% + $35,156 $3,862.50 + 25,750
$283,150+ = 39.6% +$90,200

Bush Tax Cuts (Current Rates)
$0 to $8,500 = 10%
$8,500 to $34,500 = 15% + $850
$34,500 to $83,600 = 25% + $4,750
$83,600 to $174,400 = 28% + $17,025
$174,400 to $379,150 = 33% + $42,449
$379,150+ = 35% + $110,016

(7) Obamacare penalizes people for not being able to afford health insurance on their tax return (and they still don't get any insurance!!!)
Examples:

2014; family of 2; taxable income=$26,000;
penalty=$260 ($260=$26,000x1% > $190=$95x2.)

2014; family of 3; taxable income=$26,000;
penalty=$285 ($260=$26,000x1% < $285=$95x3.)

2016; family of 3; taxable income=$26,000;
penalty=$2,085 ($650=$26,000x2.5% < $2,085=$695x3.)

2016; family of 3; taxable income=$85,000;
penalty=$2,125 ($2,125=$85,000x2.5% > $2,085=$695x3.)

2016; family of 8; taxable income=$85,000;
penalty=$2,125 ($2,1t25=$85,000x2.5% > $2,085=$695x3.)


So you all keep worrying about things like how much money Mitt and Ann have, exactly how one should best say Obama didn't grow up with a silver spoon in his mouth, and bash some Catholics, while intelligent people care about more important issues in America, OK?