Off Topic Thread X

[LegendX]

I didn't say I wouldn't vote. I said I wouldn't vote for Romney or Obama. And I may not vote. You're beehive analogy actually describes the voters. Both of these candidates are awful, they keep standing next to beehive and keep getting stung. Why not step away from the freaking beehive? What you're suggesting is to keep voting for one of these guys despite not believing they are best candidate. Some people would say that the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again, and expecting different results. When a sports team is a perennial lose, what do the fans do? They stop going to the games; they stop giving their money and stop giving their loyalty to an organization that doesn't deserve it. Maybe I don't want to keep attending the game.

I never suggested you had to vote for one of the two, you can vote for whoever you like, I'm just saying that I dislike people that complain about their government when they do nothing about it - and I'm not talking about you specifically, I'm generalizing, what you said just triggered it. Then there's the people with the wrong motives; I have a friend that once said that all government is evil and just wants to control people, he then proceeded to say he was going to vote for another party because the party wanted to legalize marijuana, despite the fact that they wanted to heavily tax Australia's mining industry, among other things.

Sadly, when elections come down to the two main political parties, it's always a matter of picking the lesser of to evils, it's never a win-win situation, it's more or less a situation where you have to decide if you want to lose by 10 points or 20.

[LegendX]

And please, people, don't ever complain about your nation's leader and how bad they are an how much they lie and deceive, until you've had a unmarried, red-headed ginger female with a monotone voice, and Michael Jackson-esque nose.

[AddiX]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/1...6pLid%3D221152

Here are a couple more, but I'm sure you'll just ignore these as well, since it's convenient.

I'm done now, it's not worth it anymore. The people are screwed either way.

Your confusng the difference in rhetoric and lies. Both use fluff in there rhetoric, Romney is the only one who flat out lies, and flat out flip flops on any And almost every issue.

Lieing is Romney saying his tax plan benefits the middle class, which it would be completely impossible and would devastate the middle class.

Rhetoric is Romney saying the gas prices have raised since Obama has been in presidency. Completely true statement. Truth, presidents don't have a damn thing to do with gas prices, unless you start a damn war.

There's a small difference in lieing and rhetoric, and that's what politics is.

[justinnum1]

romney's tax plan would add trillions to our deficit. trillions.

[AddiX]

Romney is George bush on steroids, that's why when he was asked the difference between him and bush he had no answers. He just kept saying, it's different times.

Reminder, this country was in a surplus when Clinton was president, it took bush a month to put it right back in debt. He saw $ in the bank , and immediately gabe a tax break to the rich. SMH...

[justinnum1]

to bad clinton cant run again. he would win in a land slide

[whitekimbo]

Oh my god...Facebook now here with all the political ********.

SHUT THE **** UP!

[AddiX]

to bad clinton cant run again. he would win in a land slide

We gave him **** for getting a blow job from a fat chick, meanwhile italys president is having orgys with models.

[justinnum1]

Oh my god...Facebook now here with all the political ********.

SHUT THE **** UP!

Sorry for being interested in what happens with the leadership of the country.

[LegendX]

to bad clinton cant run again. he would win in a land slide

I thought he could run again?

[SoxDolphan26]

Romney is George bush on steroids, that's why when he was asked the difference between him and bush he had no answers. He just kept saying, it's different times.

Reminder, this country was in a surplus when Clinton was president, it took bush a month to put it right back in debt. He saw $ in the bank , and immediately gabe a tax break to the rich. SMH...

It's a lot more simple and a lot more complicated than most people believe. And I think it's important that this be explained, so people can understand what's actually happening and why it's happened. There are 4 people who have contributed to the financial crisis we are in, right now. Those 4 people are Ronald Reagan, Bill Clinton, George W. Bush, and Barack Obama. It's a very complicated issue, but when you break it down to brass tax it comes down to a few simple points for each president.

The economy was falling into the dumpster when Reagan took office. In order to stimulate the economy, Reagan cut taxes across the board. As a result, people and businesses had more money to spend which meant people could spend more and business could hire more people. However, this had an effect on the deficit. Because taxes were cut, the government had less revenue and fell into the debt at an extraordinary amount for the time.

After the Bush Sr. years, Clinton inherited a strong economy that was leftover from the Reagan years. However, he had to deal with a lot of the deficit that was leftover as well. Clinton raised taxes in order curb the deficit, eventually coming into a surplus. With the surplus, however, the Clinton administration pressured the government institutions Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac (basically mortgage companies) into giving out higher risk loans to low to moderate income people. This wasn't a problem since the economy was doing well.

During the 2000 election, the economy started to go into a small recession that only got larger as the years went on. With unemployment starting to creep up and the economy getting worse, Bush cut taxes. The tax cuts, just like in the Reagan years, was supposed to boost the economy. And it worked for a while, but the deficit was increasing significantly as a result. However, the tax cuts didn't work for long and the economy declined. Because of the decline, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac completely bottomed out and the **** pretty much hit the fan. Because of the Clinton policies regarding Fannie and Freddie, and other similar institutions. We were now in the housing and mortgage crisis that we still feeling effects of. Bush then added to the problem by increasing the deficit tremendously. He increased spending, cut more taxes, and put money towards a stimulus package that failed.

Enter Obama. Obama kept the Bush era taxes and put forth a $787 billion stimulus package to grow the economy combined with the numerous bailouts of banks and the auto industry. This increased the deficit to a level that has basically never been seen before in this country between the policies of Bush and Obama. The problem is that the tax cuts and stimulus package are growing the economy at very, very, very slow rate, all while the deficit grows.

If you followed me through this journey then you can see they all had a hand in the problems we are having now financially/economically. Obama has had less of part to play since he's only been office for one term; his issue so far has been overpromising (his plan fell well short of where he said during the last election, I think that's where most people have an issue with him this year).

Now let's go to present and put into simple summation of what Romney and Obama want to do to fix the mess.

Obama wants to pull a Clinton, basically. He wants to raise taxes (which would actually takes us back to the tax rates Clinton enforced) and increase the government revenue and cut federal spending, which is supposed to decrease the deficit.

Romney wants to cut taxes, but he would eliminate many of the deductions and loopholes tax payers can use, which actually means you would be paying more taxes then it seems. To explain this let's use a very simplistic example. Say you normally pay $3,000 in taxes, but deductions get you down $1,500. With Romney's plan, you would pay $2,500 in taxes, and the deductions that aren't eliminated get you down to $2,000. So, in reality, Romney is in fact cutting taxes, but he's closing the deduction/loopholes so you are actually paying more taxes. With that, Romney wants cut federal spending and get the State governments more involved. Both of which are supposed to cut the deficit.

That's a very simplistic look at it, but it's fairly accurate. The fact is that Obama and Romney are going to do very similar things when it comes to the deficit, but they will completely differ on where the federal spending will be cut. And they are both basically sitting on their *** until the economy picks up, which because of the law of averages will eventually happen. It's the deficit that they need to be the most concerned about, so they don't bottom out like Greece did. This will be very difficult to do if they try to do if they try to stimulate the economy as well. Also, both of their policies kick the can down the road, They'll do enough to get by and leave a mess for the next guy, just like the majority of presidents since Jimmy Carter. Also, one more side note, a lot of this has to do with the parties not wanting to work with each other. All these plans get shaved down until both sides are happy, and by that time, they are completely useless.

Edit: I never thought I would post anything like this on a football forum...

[justinnum1]

I thought he could run again?

president can serve a maximum of 2 terms(4yrs each) clinton served from 92-2000

[georgiadolfan]

I think Romney has single handedly turned me from a Republican to a Democrat

[Wrench]

I think Romney has single handedly turned me from a Republican to a Democrat

The republican party pretty much did that for me.

[whitekimbo]

Sorry for being interested in what happens with the leadership of the country.

You crying about how both are corrupt wont change anything. Just sayin