Best President for Podiatry

[spooge]

Quick comments on spreading the wealth, then I have to finish my work for the week and get to work.

Raise your hand if pay taxes or have paid taxes. Dont lie about this...Good. If you have bought gas, food (depending on the state you are in), CD's, DVD's, mirrors (for some of the more self absorbed ones), water, electricity, stunguns, handguns, water, detergent, candy for halloween, tampons for your wife or girlfriend (can I get a price check on tampax for the gentleman at register 4 please), icecream during those long nights of pregnant cravings, books, toilet paper, two - sixpacks of beer, a bottle of wine, g-string (for your south beach trip), made a copayment for insurance, gum, school ID, school parking (if u r from barry this $$$ goes straight to the pope), tires for your car, serpentine belts, spark plugs, gauze, razors, more d a m n gas, tipped the bartender, or stripper, then you are spreading the wealth around.

The sound rebuttle to this should be: "But in this case we decide what to spread and how to spread it, how can we justify a politician who does not understand our needs doing this?" In which case, my response is: "I am talking about the taxes you pay on all of this stuff, not the stuff itself." Taxes, taxes, taxes...everyone raised their hand. Everyone pays taxes, and the current system is structured by the 1929 tax override. Is it a fair system? Some say "NO" and others say "Sure." So, here is my "sure" take on "spreading the wealth." If we did not spread the wealth, I would have no roads to take me from point 'a' to point 'b'. I need those roads so I can go to school and work to get money so I can spread some of the wealth around to those who also need to get to school and/or work. That way Publix will get the beer I want, so I can buy it and spread my wealth to Publix whose taxes and can subsidize better methods of travel and more efficient transpotation. I recognize that without spreading the wealth, the average "spooge" could not afford 1.5 million for flight training and have the opportunity to fly the world's greatest aircraft. I realize that if I did not spread the wealth, many of the nurses and medical assistants that I work with could not afford the training to become a nurse or MA. I realize that if I did not spread the wealth, many of the businesses that I purchase things from would not be there. I realize that if I did not spread the wealth I would have absolutely NO chance at any kind educational opportunity. I realize that if I did not spread the wealth I would not have protection from the military. I realize that if I did not spread the wealth, there might be a friend that is really struggling and does not want to come to me to ask about getting money for food. I realize that if did not spread the wealth, many, many disabled people (vets and nonvets) would be left to fend for themselves in terms of finding food, water, shelter and clothes. This refers back to the post where Webster defines 'Patriotism' as the love for and devotion to one's country. It is not only my responsibility to take care of myself, but if blessed, to take care of others also. I definitely do not mind spreading the wealth because it benefits everyone, even the one doing the spreading. So take it like a man (or woman) and spread it!

Now, to quickly discuss the issue of the top 5% paying the great majority of taxes. Nevermind...I discussed this before...if you bring in $21,000 per month and cannot handle $417 increase in taxes then you are either selfish or terrible with finances. Selfish does not equal patriotic. Plain and simple. Everyone deserves life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

Lastly, lets clear up some misunderstands we have about the democrats role in congress. Without the 2/3 majorty in congress it is impossible to override the vetoed bills that the dems sent to the president. To say they have done nothing is a little over exaggerated because the president has only vetoed 94% of the bills the dems in the house and senate have sent him. He seems to only believe in executive orders. IF there was a 2/3 override majority AND virtually nothing had been done, then, and only then could you reasonably complaim about them doing nothing.

Peace - Im out-E 5,000

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[jonwill]

I'm not one to comment much on politics as it is all just extremely annoying to me at this point. I will admit though that Obama's comment on "spreading the wealth" really did make me angry. That sounds an awful lot like communism to me. Let the government take your money and allot it as THEY deem neccesary. One thing that NEITHER side of the aisle excels at is deciding how to spend money!

 

[Feli]

I'm not one to comment much on politics as it is all just extremely annoying to me at this point. I will admit though that Obama's comment on "spreading the wealth" really did make me angry. That sounds an awful lot like communism to me. Let the government take your money and allot it as THEY deem neccesary. One thing that NEITHER side of the aisle excels at is deciding how to spend money!

Well, maybe we need more govt jobs paid by taxes to help decide how to spend the tax money?

Why simply let the current American electric car companies grow and hybrid cars roll off assembly lines in Det, Ohio, etc? Is anyone really content having to actually work, educate yourself, save up, and build credit before you can borrow money and get a house? Heck no... that stuff sounds hard. We need to stop rewarding the greedy workers and businesses who earn the money and pay the taxes. A good first step is more taxes and more government control to push govt programs things along and make sure there are no broke people! While govt decides how to "spread the (OUR) weath," we can also make sure they all have nice suits to wear to the congress, expensive parties and travel to help ease their stresses, and good rich retirement packages when they finish their tough careers of deciding how to tax and spend working America's money. They must get tired doing so much good for everyone.

I'll be glad to pay for more government. I surely want to pay increased income tax, capital gains tax, property tax, small business tax on my practice, death taxes on my savings/estate, etc etc etc taxes. Who needs financial incentives to work hard and that silly American dream of having that hard work help to improve the quality of life for myself and my family in future generations? I just want to make sure that my hard work helps me to pay more taxes and expands the government so that they can "redistribute" my wealth to those who don't pay their taxes. I always thought govt was just for military, public schools, and infrastructure/roads? Silly me. Now, we have realized that we can also let the govt run mortgages, health care, and soooo much more if we vote (and pay) for the socialist democratic guys who know what's best. Those friendly guys are so comminted to their good intentions that they are even spending campaign money (aka tax money) to help mentally ill homeless people travel to the polls in droves. That's just swell.

Maybe I can quit donating money at church and charity... or at least cut down?
Heck, the govt knows what's best and who needs the money, right?

 

[doclm]

Well, maybe we need more govt jobs paid by taxes to help decide how to spend the tax money?

Why simply let the current American electric car companies grow and hybrid cars roll off assembly lines in Det, Ohio, etc? Is anyone really content having to actually work, educate yourself, save up, and build credit before you can borrow money and get a house? Heck no... that stuff sounds hard. We need to stop rewarding the greedy workers and businesses who earn the money and pay the taxes. A good first step is more taxes and more government control to push govt programs things along and make sure there are no broke people! While govt decides how to "spread the (OUR) weath," we can also make sure they all have nice suits to wear to the congress, expensive parties and travel to help ease their stresses, and good rich retirement packages when they finish their tough careers of deciding how to tax and spend working America's money. They must get tired doing so much good for everyone.

I'll be glad to pay for more government. I surely want to pay increased income tax, capital gains tax, property tax, small business tax on my practice, death taxes on my savings/estate, etc etc etc taxes. Who needs financial incentives to work hard and that silly American dream of having that hard work help to improve the quality of life for myself and my family in future generations? I just want to make sure that my hard work helps me to pay more taxes and expands the government so that they can "redistribute" my wealth to those who don't pay their taxes. I always thought govt was just for military, public schools, and infrastructure/roads? Silly me. Now, we have realized that we can also let the govt run mortgages, health care, and soooo much more if we vote (and pay) for the socialist democratic guys who know what's best. Those friendly guys are so comminted to their good intentions that they are even spending campaign money (aka tax money) to help mentally ill homeless people travel to the polls in droves. That's just swell.

Maybe I can quit donating money at church and charity... or at least cut down?
Heck, the govt knows what's best and who needs the money, right?

Yeah...that's exactly why I chose to quit a decent paying job, move away from home and live below poverty for 4 years while keeping a constant "drive" during medical school. The funny thing is, that I probably have less groceries and less medical coverage than most people on welfare. However, when I get done with 4 years of undergrad, 4 year of medical school, and 3 years of residency all I want to do is "redistribute" >50% of my hard earned $$$ to government and welfare.

 

[215512]

Yeah...that's exactly why I chose to quit a decent paying job, move away from home and live below poverty for 4 years while keeping a constant "drive" during medical school. The funny thing is, that I probably have less groceries and less medical coverage than most people on welfare. However, when I get done with 4 years of undergrad, 4 year of medical school, and 3 years of residency all I want to do is "redistribute" >50% of my hard earned $$$ to government and welfare.

h/o a second there-50% !? !? !? !?

 

[JEWmongous]

h/o a second there-50% !? !? !? !?

This is America, not sweden/denmark/norway

 

[dtrack22]

I've heard a few people grumbling about Iraq, but the explanation for our presence is simple. We need an ally in the Middle East. Saudi Arabia essentially kicked us out awhile ago and relations with those countries got even more sour. While I don't agree that our invasion strategy was ideal, and that spending for the war was out of control (a major contributor to the increased deficit), I think that staying there until Iraq is somewhat stable is a necessity. And if I'm voting for someone who is best qualified to do that it would be McCain.

What I'm most concerned about as a pre-pod is Obama's ultra-socialistic (in relative US terms) health care plan. Who knows what he is actually going to attempt to implement since the people he surrounds himself with, his voting records, and written statements on his website, seem to contradict what he says in the debates on national television. Will we see the universal plan or the slightly gov. regulated plan that he talks about when on tv? I think competition in the health-care industry is very good for our citizens (patients) and creates health-care professionals who are constantly having to keep up with an ever-evolving field.

That brings up a question I have had though in attempts to formulate my own "cure-all" solution. I'm still conflicted being a very pro-capitalist/free market kind of guy, but why can't we just put some checks on private health insurance companies? Does the CEO of premera really need an $11 million dollar salary? Couldn't you find someone who would take the job for $3 million (last salary I saw for blue-shield, a non-prof) and then redistribute (can't believe I just said that) the money to customers? That money could decrease the number of denied claims, create more entry-level jobs within the company, drive down costs of plans, etc. It seems to me like the insurance companies are the one's who are causing a lot of this mess as opposed to Bush, congress, etc. I guess it could actually be traced back to lawyers, but you can never get rid of them no matter how bad you want to (kinda like herpes ). I'm sure there are many practicing Doc's who will tell me exactly why that wouldn't work, but that's what I want to hear. I want to make the most educated decision possible when voting for whoever is going to be in office as I go through pod school, racking up debt, and setting the stage for the professional climate in which I will eventually enter.

 

[IlizaRob]

Quick comments on spreading the wealth, then I have to finish my work for the week and get to work.

Raise your hand if pay taxes or have paid taxes. Dont lie about this...Good. If you have bought gas, food (depending on the state you are in), CD's, DVD's, mirrors (for some of the more self absorbed ones), water, electricity, stunguns, handguns, water, detergent, candy for halloween, tampons for your wife or girlfriend (can I get a price check on tampax for the gentleman at register 4 please), icecream during those long nights of pregnant cravings, books, toilet paper, two - sixpacks of beer, a bottle of wine, g-string (for your south beach trip), made a copayment for insurance, gum, school ID, school parking (if u r from barry this $$$ goes straight to the pope), tires for your car, serpentine belts, spark plugs, gauze, razors, more d a m n gas, tipped the bartender, or stripper, then you are spreading the wealth around.

The sound rebuttle to this should be: "But in this case we decide what to spread and how to spread it, how can we justify a politician who does not understand our needs doing this?" In which case, my response is: "I am talking about the taxes you pay on all of this stuff, not the stuff itself." Taxes, taxes, taxes...everyone raised their hand. Everyone pays taxes, and the current system is structured by the 1929 tax override. Is it a fair system? Some say "NO" and others say "Sure." So, here is my "sure" take on "spreading the wealth." If we did not spread the wealth, I would have no roads to take me from point 'a' to point 'b'. I need those roads so I can go to school and work to get money so I can spread some of the wealth around to those who also need to get to school and/or work. That way Publix will get the beer I want, so I can buy it and spread my wealth to Publix whose taxes and can subsidize better methods of travel and more efficient transpotation. I recognize that without spreading the wealth, the average "spooge" could not afford 1.5 million for flight training and have the opportunity to fly the world's greatest aircraft. I realize that if I did not spread the wealth, many of the nurses and medical assistants that I work with could not afford the training to become a nurse or MA. I realize that if I did not spread the wealth, many of the businesses that I purchase things from would not be there. I realize that if I did not spread the wealth I would have absolutely NO chance at any kind educational opportunity. I realize that if I did not spread the wealth I would not have protection from the military. I realize that if I did not spread the wealth, there might be a friend that is really struggling and does not want to come to me to ask about getting money for food. I realize that if did not spread the wealth, many, many disabled people (vets and nonvets) would be left to fend for themselves in terms of finding food, water, shelter and clothes. This refers back to the post where Webster defines 'Patriotism' as the love for and devotion to one's country. It is not only my responsibility to take care of myself, but if blessed, to take care of others also. I definitely do not mind spreading the wealth because it benefits everyone, even the one doing the spreading. So take it like a man (or woman) and spread it!

Now, to quickly discuss the issue of the top 5% paying the great majority of taxes. Nevermind...I discussed this before...if you bring in $21,000 per month and cannot handle $417 increase in taxes then you are either selfish or terrible with finances. Selfish does not equal patriotic. Plain and simple. Everyone deserves life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

Lastly, lets clear up some misunderstands we have about the democrats role in congress. Without the 2/3 majorty in congress it is impossible to override the vetoed bills that the dems sent to the president. To say they have done nothing is a little over exaggerated because the president has only vetoed 94% of the bills the dems in the house and senate have sent him. He seems to only believe in executive orders. IF there was a 2/3 override majority AND virtually nothing had been done, then, and only then could you reasonably complaim about them doing nothing.

Peace - Im out-E 5,000

Why do you keep bringing up this example of spreading the wealth by paying "sales tax"? Your definition of "spreading the wealth" is completely different than what Obama is suggesting. Yes, we pay taxes that go to pay for roads and the police force. The main purpose of taxes is to keep a functioning government. Not to punish successful Joe by taking his hard earned money and giving it to unsuccessful Jim. This is not the purpose of taxes yet this is what Obama is proposing. I understand that only a small percentage of people make over $250,000 and this is why Obama can easily sell it to all the suckers. I dont know if I will ever make over $250,000 but I want to make sure that if I work hard enough to make that kind of doe, I want it to stay in my pocket. Otherwise, whats the point?

Dont people realize that although there is a small percentage who make this kind of money, it is them who contribute most to the growth of the economy? It is them who create the jobs, the same job that unsuccessful jim relies on to feed his family. Why would someone want to grow their business, think outside the box, expand their horizons, innovate, discover and invent when there is no financial incentive????

And what is with the sense of entitlement that today's Americans possess? As if everyone including the government owes them something. People think that they deserve that nice new car, or that nice home, or all the healthcare they can handle without paying for it. That's why Obama is gaining so much popularity. "I like that guy, he gets me. He will give me more without working any harder". No wonder why Obama has sparked a record number of voters who have traditionally never voted in their lives. Whatever happend to integrity and personal responsibility?

This whole situation makes me so angry. Everyone is asking for change. Well, I dont want to hear any complaining when they realize they dont like the "change" that BO brings.

 

[GymMan]

...

 

[spooge]

I was, in general, speaking of taxes ad valoreum. I pay property taxes and sales taxes, tolls, etc....anything taxed by the value of good and taken at the time of purchase. I chose this form of tax because I do not believe the majority of people on this forum own property or a small business. But lets specifically look at payroll tax, corporate tax, estate and gift tax, capital gains tax, and individual income tax. All of which affect everyone here.

I will keep it short for you:

corporate tax = initially 35% of profits are taxed, but that tax was passed along to the share holders in 2002. The majority of corporations are getting a double tax break by listing up to 75% of their profits as dividends and letting the great majority of their profit skip the tax man. As a single family unit paying taxes, neither you nor I qualify for these special priviledges. Most coporations pay less than 12% of their "take home pay" in taxes...please note that I used "take home pay"...while the property owners, small business people and joe plumbers pay close to 31% on their "take home pay" after they have paid income taxes

Please note that 80% of our income immediately qualifies for taxation and the coporation only qualifies for 19% of their profit income.

payroll tax = social security, medicare, unemployment = 6.2%, 1.4%, and 0.1%. This means that you pay this much and the business you work for pays this much. If you own the business then you get a tax break for paying double on yourself and a seperate tax break for paying your employees share.

capital gains tax = is the tax on the profit documented profit from the sale of an asset. Usually in the form of stocks and bonds. 70% of Americans own stocks. But only 0.001% of Americans earn their living from trading. This is measured as income by the government. The average hedge fund manager earns $4.9 million per year. Most of these managers use the corporate loophole of calling their salary a dividend and filing under coporate status. This leaves the average hedgefund manager paying less than 17% and you and I still paying around 31%. We could argue the intelligence of the hedge fund manager, but the playing field is not level. You and I cannot qualify, under the current federal laws, to double dip as an individual and a coporation.

estate and gift taxes = when granny takes the dirt nap and she gives you $100K, you have to pay taxes on it. A lot of this leads to the argument over the inheritance tax. I do not really agree with this form of taxation, but whatever, this is usually a one-time deal. I want to talk about everyday things. We can argue about this all you want to, but I want to get to the real issue of income taxes.

income taxes = tax on the financial income of me, you, corporations, or small businesses. Our income tax system is mostly a progressive system that was instituted in 1929. First and formost, you and I pay roughly 31% of our income on taxes. Some are income taxes, but the progressive scale allows for people who earn more to pay more. Please note that this scale is very generous when it comes to deductions. As far as withholding is concerned. I take all of my money home and pay the government at the end of the year. I would rather use my money then send one big, or small check. Now, lets take a difference between corporations and us. Corporations have the option to forward a portion or all of their taxes to a later date in time. This amount of time can be 1 to 20 years. You and I can have three to six extra months. As an individual, try not paying your property tax and see what happens. Next, try telling the state tax collector you need 20 years to catch up on your profits and regain your momentum that you have lost in the competition market. And, like corporations, you wish to not pay a penalty. I know. Anyone who owns a home is laughing.

Simple Facts: Obama's plan will not raise taxes on 98% of small businesses and will give a tax break to 95% of working Americans.

"Dont people realize that although there is a small percentage who make this kind of money, it is them who contribute most to the growth of the economy? It is them who create the jobs, the same job that unsuccessful jim relies on to feed his family. Why would someone want to grow their business, think outside the box, expand their horizons, innovate, discover and invent when there is no financial incentive????"


Again...this tax thing is not about working hard or not working hard. It is about leveling the playing field. The great majority of students that I know are working hard, but make nowhere near the 20,000 mark per year. Don't diss them because you feel that at 250,000 you would be working hard, but at 200,000 you would not...same at 100,000...same at 50,000...same at 20,000. We all work hard, but this is about leveling the playing field. This is about taxation policies that favor those with much higher incomes. Look it up. The greatest difference seen will be those who earn more than 3 million per year. Not those "scraping by" at 250,000 or 300,000. Your change in taxes per year if you are making 300,000 would be 42 more per month...and you are calling that punishment...get over yourself...I can just see the inventor in his garage saying "I probably should not invent this because I would have to pay $42 more per month in taxes."

"And what is with the sense of entitlement that today's Americans possess? As if everyone including the government owes them something."

You would never say that to my face. Never. I have worked everyday of my life since i was 14. I was entilted to nothing. I moved out at 18 and worked fulltime during school. I have been a janitor and I have been a food service worker. I worked hard. I earned my bars in the Navy...I earned my wings...every push up, pull up, every mile, every engine failure, every close call, every scare, every aircraft malfunction, every take off and every landing...I worked hard after the Navy to finish my courses to go to Pod school and I work hard now...in class and after class...I am owed nothing...But I would not be where I am today if Uncle Sam did not stretch out his hand with $30,000 per year and tell me to pay him back later. I am not like you. I do not have a rich relative or parent to pay my way through school. I take the loans, and one day I will pay him back.

"People think that they deserve that nice new car, or that nice home, or all the healthcare they can handle without paying for it."

Again, healthcare does not equal a new car. Ask a person in oncology receiving chemo if they would rather have a new car, or their life? Ask a mother of 3, with two sick children, working two jobs, to pay for food and insurance, if she would rather have an affordable heath insurance plan to be able to take her children to the doctor for treatment, or a new car? Ask the 23 y/o bf with multiple GSW's to chest and arm if she would rather have a new home, or her lungs and arm repaired? It is life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Liberty is meaningless and you cannot pursue happiness if you do not have life.

"That's why Obama is gaining so much popularity. "I like that guy, he gets me. He will give me more without working any harder". No wonder why Obama has sparked a record number of voters who have traditionally never voted in their lives. Whatever happend to integrity and personal responsibility?"

Tell that to the janitor working 60 hours per week and the secretary that has to work a weekend job, just to live. They don't have integrity or the concept of personal responsibility?

What about the responsibility from those who are better off than us? What about ENRON and the fact that many Americans cannot retire because their financial situation has eroded to nothing? What about the elderly people choosing between food and drugs? This whole trickle down economics thing has gotten me thinking: What DID happen to integrity and responsibility?

 

[Marine1]

I saw the comments on the war, and I wanted to throw in a couple of thoughts on the war and medicine. I was accepted to pod school two years ago. But I was called back for Iraq/Afghanistan part 2 before I could start. My mission the first time was kicking down doors and training for battlefield tramua managment. My mission the second time was mostly tramua and squad duf. As far as our mission in Iraq, the surge worked, even though Obama will not admit that it worked. But my point is about needing allies in the middle east. We need allies everywhere, and the only reason we are allies with Iraq, Saud, and Kuwait is our funding of their national treasure called oil. They have the trump card when it comes to us needing them. Simple and sweet...we should have hit afghanistan harder than Iraq...we did not...we have to pay for it...as far as being in Iraq...I say to get out now...as far as commander-in-chief, I would like to see McCain...but I am stressed about the "drill baby drill" policy...Our relationship with the middle east needs to be on an eye to eye basis where they need us as much as we need them...when we do not need their oil and can call their bluff, we will have the true bargaining power...so as far as future power generating policies I am for Obama...the faster, the better...get the rest of my shipmates and marines out of Iraq safely, but timely...let the Iraqis do their own killing...lets actually find osama bin laden, bring him back and send him to trial for terrorism . As far as medicine and the future of medicine...I can only see an unregulated insurance industry running us farther down the ladder in the WHO's ranking of medical providers...as far as socialist care...the best treatment I ever received was from the doctors, pa's, techs, and nurses from military...secondly, obama does not want to institute socialism...I do like McCain's background in military efficiency...so as far as I am concerned...I am still undecided. I have to rank my priorities and pick the candidate that best represents my top five issues.

 

[MaseratiGT]

One quick question: where does that $150B come from in a tough economy? Tack it onto the debt? Deflate the value of our currency and tax more? ding ding ding

From the money that would have been spent on this debacle we call Iraq, that will no longer be draining billions of dollars from this country.

 

[Feli]

From the money that would have been spent on this debacle we call Iraq, that will no longer be draining billions of dollars from this country.

"The quickest way to end a war is to lose it." (George Orwell)
It's very dangerous to quickly abandon a newly established Iraqi government and free peope which still have a lot of lingering rebels who will look to recapture the nation... or at least wreak havoc. That sends a message of disrespect to not only the Iraqi people who we pledged to help, but also the rest of the world who may aid us in fighting terrorist groups in the future (Afghanastan, Pakistan, other mid east nations, etc). The tyrant dictatorships rely on fear, and they are not easy to rise against. Groups who welcome and assist the US efforts are risking quite a lot, and it'd be pretty for us to give them some help but then abandom them before the generals and intelligence on the ground feels they are safe and able to defend themselves.

In a simplistic sense, it's a good thought that withdrawing Iraq would save tax monies, but if you'd watched the debates, you'd know that Obama wants to send tons of new troops into Afghanistan and possibly Pakistan, a reasonably hostile nation where we may have little or no support.

Obama is VERY good at spending taxpayer money. Heck, he's probably one of the best ever!

Just take a look at his presidential campaign spending: an all time record by any politician worldwide... and it's not even close. He has spent 2-3 times as much on TV and radio ads as McCain has, and current polls say it may win him the election. Obama will spend tens of millions of campain money on his 30min primetime national TV slots tonight... maybe he plans to announce whether or not he will send Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac a "thank you" note for that donation money? Many months ago, he quietly backpeddled out of his initial promises to limit campaign spending to $84M, which he, McCain and both parties had agreed upon. The vast majority of Barack's US senate bills were asking for new govt monies (aka tax monies), and he showed again and again in limited senate experience that he can spend like no other in history.

People who honestly believe the "only those making above 250k per year will have their taxes raised" yet think Obama can deliver all of his lofty promises and programs (alternative energy funding, socialized health care for all, Afghanistan missions, vastly increased social services) are very naive. You know the old saying: "if it sounds too good to be true, ________." You can either have less govt programs and lower taxes, or you can have more govt controlled services and more taxes. A government has only one source of spending money: its people. Sorry, that doesn't change, no matter how much you advertise.

The funny part is that all of these issues will rapidly quiet down in a few weeks once the election is over. The vast majority is just a media circus. These issues (miliatry, economy, environment, health care, etc) are always there and do deserve consideration, but they always become rediculously important in election years since the media drums up a storm. The majority of media is liberal, but why wouldn't they be? Who are their main customers... sitting at home casually watching TV or listening to the radio while others are working to pay taxes?

 

[JEWmongous]

6 days till Caribou Barbie is sent back to the wilderness. I cannot wait. I respect McCain but that broad is such a dink.

 

[jonwill]

I notice that a fair amount of people seem to be for Obama. But it also seems obvious to most of us that whether he is really aware of it or not (hey, he's a politician), his "middle class plan" is going to quickly backfire and CREAM the middle class. Not raising taxes on the middle class (if he really doesn't) means that he will make the money up by taxing businesses to death. Let's be realistic! The government isn't going to spend less (especially with a democrat in office) and the money has to come from somewhere. The businesses are just going to turn around and pass the tax hike on to those who spend money, yes, the middle class. Not to mention the fact that businesses will have less disposable income which means that they will in turn have less money to hire and pay employees affecting...you guessed it, the middle class! I hope he didn't spend a lot of time on this whole economic plan because it really is pretty idiotic.

So while some of you may be eagar to have Obama elected, I hope you're equally as eagar to actively fight the socialized healthcare reform that he will undoubtedly attempt to pass in the near future, that is, unless you're OK with making 80K a year. But hey, at least it will be under 250K

 

[MaseratiGT]

"The quickest way to end a war is to lose it." (George Orwell)
It's very dangerous to quickly abandon a newly established Iraqi government and free peope which still have a lot of lingering rebels who will look to recapture the nation... or at least wreak havoc. That sends a message of disrespect to not only the Iraqi people who we pledged to help, but also the rest of the world who may aid us in fighting terrorist groups in the future (Afghanastan, Pakistan, other mid east nations, etc). The tyrant dictatorships rely on fear, and they are not easy to rise against. Groups who welcome and assist the US efforts are risking quite a lot, and it'd be pretty for us to give them some help but then abandom them before the generals and intelligence on the ground feels they are safe and able to defend themselves.

How free would you feel if you couldn't leave your home for fear of being blown to bits? How free is it that Christians in Iraq must practice in secret for fear of being kidnapped and killed? How free is it that nearly a dozen members of the anti-corruption probe team in Iraq have been killed or had family members killed? (See the Washington Post). Explain to me how Iraq is free?

Additionally, the last time I checked, an invasion built on lies and propaganda isn't synonymous with pledging help to ailing citizens. There's little, if any scraps of early rhetoric, that suggest that we invaded Iraq to spread love and harmony. This is our Vietnam. This was all said against a pullout in Vietnam during the Cold War, and alas, none of it came to pass.

The truth of the matter is; some countries are MORE stable with dictators. Democracy takes generations to cultivate and cannot be forced upon a country. And when did this miracle Iraqi army risk so much to help us over throw their government? Never. Because it didn't happen. Western forces have carried this war on the backs of their economies using their soldier's lives and collateral damage as currency. It is time to end this farce and shift focus to our own country.

It is so supercilious that you try to make this view, which many in America hold, as jejune by portraying it as "simplistic," when all you did was type propaganda. It makes "us" no less educated about the candidates than you because we ascribe to this theory.

 

[JEWmongous]

The Iraqi government wants us out by 2011. All these republicans talk about "staying the course" and not having a definite timeline. However, it's pretty bad when the Iraqi politicians themselves want the American presence to go elsewhere.

 

[Feli]

...some countries are MORE stable with dictators...

If you really believe that, then I dare ya to move to one ^

The US is one of the only countries in the world where people are literally lining up to get in. Based on multi-year waiting lists to become a US resident, I'd guess that we're doing something right lol. "Poverty" here in the US would qualify as being rich in many other parts of the world.

You don't see US citizens risking their lives to flee this country, do ya? Hundreds, sometimes thousands, of Central and South Americans as well as Caribbean peoples are trying to sneak into the USA every day. Strangely enough, there are no mail order bride catalogs with American women looking to leave and gain citizenship in Europe or Asia, now are there?

...Christians in Iraq must practice in secret...

Iraq really has nothing to do with Christianity. I'm not sure where that came from. Iraq is mostly Muslim and will remain that way. Fewer than 1% of Muslims ever convert to Christianity (yet Obama quickly did once he realized that it was needed for political gain). The Iraq war is about democracy and freedom against tyranny and dictatorship, not religion. Democracy means people are free to practice whichever religion they choose and tolerant of others' religious views.

...an invasion built on lies and propaganda isn't synonymous with pledging help to ailing citizens. There's little, if any scraps of early rhetoric, that suggest that we invaded Iraq to spread love and harmony. This is our Vietnam....

The US needs allies in the Mid East and Europe just as we do everywhere. That is common sense. A big reason we fund and defend Isreal, free Iraq, etc is because if terrorist bombs and attacks weren't going off there, they would probably be targeting the US domestic soils. They are our sheild, but we are also helping them to defend their homeland, so it's win-win. If we can help some disrupt some tyrant dictatorships and assist foreign peoples in enjoying more freedom while we establish bases, protection, intelligence, and presence overseas, then I think that's a great benefit.

You can agree or disagree with military funding and activities if you like, but consider the words of our first president, George Washington: "the best way to prevent war is to be well prepared for war." The simple way to dissuade hostile groups or nations from beginning a war is to have them realize that such a war would quickly and decisively be ended by allied nations much stronger than they. Domestic "issues" like gay rights, health care for those who don't work, govt assisted electric car research, increased welfare, abortion issues, etc become pretty darn petty in comparison to preventing a possible nuclear war... don't you agree?

I especially like the "our" Vietnam part. How much have you paid in net total federal taxes during your lifetime, and how many years of active duty have you served? Exactly how much of the US military do you think belongs to you?

 

[IlizaRob]

I notice that a fair amount of people seem to be for Obama. But it also seems obvious to most of us that whether he is really aware of it or not (hey, he's a politician), his "middle class plan" is going to quickly backfire and CREAM the middle class. Not raising taxes on the middle class (if he really doesn't) means that he will make the money up by taxing businesses to death. Let's be realistic! The government isn't going to spend less (especially with a democrat in office) and the money has to come from somewhere. The businesses are just going to turn around and pass the tax hike on to those who spend money, yes, the middle class. Not to mention the fact that businesses will have less disposable income which means that they will in turn have less money to hire and pay employees affecting...you guessed it, the middle class! I hope he didn't spend a lot of time on this whole economic plan because it really is pretty idiotic.

So while some of you may be eagar to have Obama elected, I hope you're equally as eagar to actively fight the socialized healthcare reform that he will undoubtedly attempt to pass in the near future, that is, unless you're OK with making 80K a year. But hey, at least it will be under 250K

You are spot on here. People dont realize that increasing capital gains tax will drive jobs down and the economy will crumble. Obama promises many things but when you figure the numbers, his promises will cost 4 trillion over 8 years. Thats impossible because the dollar wont be worth anything as no one will be interested in investing in this country. Either Obama will bankrupt us all, or he simply wont keep his promises. I think the latter. So much for "The chosen one".

 

[MaseratiGT]

If you really believe that, then I dare ya to move to one ^

The US is one of the only countries in the world where people are literally lining up to get in. Based on multi-year waiting lists to become a US resident, I'd guess that we're doing something right lol. "Poverty" here in the US would qualify as being rich in many other parts of the world.

You don't see US citizens risking their lives to flee this country, do ya? Hundreds, sometimes thousands, of Central and South Americans as well as Caribbean peoples are trying to sneak into the USA every day. Strangely enough, there are no mail order bride catalogs with American women looking to leave and gain citizenship in Europe or Asia, now are there?

Iraq really has nothing to do with Christianity. I'm not sure where that came from. Iraq is mostly Muslim and will remain that way. Fewer than 1% of Muslims ever convert to Christianity (yet Obama quickly did once he realized that it was needed for political gain). The Iraq war is about democracy and freedom against tyranny and dictatorship, not religion. Democracy means people are free to practice whichever religion they choose and tolerant of others' religious views.

The US needs allies in the Mid East and Europe just as we do everywhere. That is common sense. A big reason we fund and defend Isreal, free Iraq, etc is because if terrorist bombs and attacks weren't going off there, they would probably be targeting the US domestic soils. They are our sheild, but we are also helping them to defend their homeland, so it's win-win. If we can help some disrupt some tyrant dictatorships and assist foreign peoples in enjoying more freedom while we establish bases, protection, intelligence, and presence overseas, then I think that's a great benefit.

You can agree or disagree with military funding and activities if you like, but consider the words of our first president, George Washington: "the best way to prevent war is to be well prepared for war." The simple way to dissuade hostile groups or nations from beginning a war is to have them realize that such a war would quickly and decisively be ended by allied nations much stronger than they. Domestic "issues" like gay rights, health care for those who don't work, govt assisted electric car research, increased welfare, abortion issues, etc become pretty darn petty in comparison to preventing a possible nuclear war... don't you agree?

I especially like the "our" Vietnam part. How much have you paid in net total federal taxes during your lifetime, and how many years of active duty have you served? Exactly how much of the US military do you think belongs to you?

You used so many logical fallacies; all in one single post. I discuss fact and try to keep my logic based on the counterpoint. It becomes difficult to discuss when your argument is "[...]I dare ya to move to one [...]," which was the effect you were undoubtedly trying to achieve. To invoke Ad Hominem is the oldest trick in the book. But it doesn't work against people who ARE informed and really wanted to discuss the issue.

 

[spooge]

"I notice that a fair amount of people seem to be for Obama."

hmmmm...taking a look at the poll at the top of the page shows a different story...maybe that is why you are confused about Obama's economic plan and how it will help you?

"People dont realize that increasing capital gains tax will drive jobs down and the economy will crumble."

yeah those terrible capital gains taxes that drove this economy into the ground in the nineties...awful awful taxes...I remember the 90's were so tuff...I never thought I would make it through with all of capital gains taxes...the stock market crumbled and people lost their houses...Oh wait, this scenario is in 2008, under Bush with the Bush tax cuts on capital gains that the market crashed and people lost their houses...hmmmm...great argument...I will be happy when this is all over. Please note that the highest capital gains taxes were under Clinton from 94-98...please also note this time had the highest job growth numbers since the great depression...the lowest unemployment rate...the third strongest GDP numbers in our country's history...the highest percentage of people living and prospering in the middle class...sorry about the spelling...gotta jet

Can anyone say P-r-e-s-i-d-e-n-t O-b-a-m-a? That is right...attention on deck

 

[ldsrmdude]

It is so supercilious that you try to make this view, which many in America hold, as jejune by portraying it as "simplistic," when all you did was type propaganda. It makes "us" no less educated about the candidates than you because we ascribe to this theory.

Is anyone else tired of crap like this? I spent more time trying to figure out what this "simplistic" message said with my online thesaurus, than I did studying last week. Maybe I am just a simpleton, but I would much rather have a discussion where neither person had to speak condescendingly to prove a point.

You used so many logical fallacies; all in one single post. I discuss fact and try to keep my logic based on the counterpoint. It becomes difficult to discuss when your argument is "[...]I dare ya to move to one [...]," which was the effect you were undoubtedly trying to achieve. To invoke Ad Hominem is the oldest trick in the book. But it doesn't work against people who ARE informed and really wanted to discuss the issue.

Apparently it does because you stopped arguing

MaseratiGT, I agree with some of your points. I think that you're right, this is our generations Vietnam, but we should learn from what did happen in Vietnam. Giving up and shipping home isn't a great idea, at least not with things the way they are. That is one of my big issues with Obama's foreign policy. There is certaintly merit in the argument that we shouldn't have gone into Iraq in the first place, but we have no choice in that now, we're there and can only deal with it how it is now. Spending all our time casting blame (and there is plenty to go around) won't get us out of this mess anymore than hoping for a change will. We need someone with a tough, aggressive foreign policy right now. When the main issue was foreign policy, Obama was losing. He handled the Georgia/Russia conflict like an amateur. Now that focus has been shifted to domestic affairs like the economy, he has been able to use that as a cover to hide his weaknesses. I hope that Joe Biden is wrong, that Barack Obama will not be tested with an international crisis in his first 6 months, because we can't afford for him to "still have his training wheels on." In my mind his economic policy is just as bad. Let me add here that I think McCains is not much better, but at least his policy involves some financial responsibility for the government, and not just a bigger checkbook with no money in the bank. As I said, I may be a simpleton, but that's how I see things.

 

[Feli]

If Obama hadn't advertised his many promises relentlessly (socialized health care, more social services, alternative energy funds, etc), does anyone think he'd have a shot in this election? Does anyone think he, or anyone with less than 6mo in the US senate before declaring themself a presidential candidate, could win just based on issues and his track record?

I'm genuinely curious:
Should a guy who has such rock solid credentials and solutions for the issues really need to out-spend his opponent nearly 4:1 on advertising???

http://www.ktvu.com/politics/17755711/detail.html (these figures were even before the primetime TV blocks)
"Obama's numbers are possible because he opted out of the public financing system for the fall campaign. McCain, the Republican nominee, chose to participate in the system, which limits him to $84 million for the September-October stretch before the election.

Obama's monthly figure pushed his total fundraising to $605 million. No presidential candidate has ever run such an expensive campaign...

...Obama had initially promised to accept public financing if McCain did, but changed his mind after setting primary fundraising records. His extraordinary fundraising is bound to set a new standard in politics that could doom the taxpayer-paid system..."

...Obama promises many things but when you figure the numbers, his promises will cost 4 trillion over 8 years. Thats impossible because the dollar wont be worth anything as no one will be interested in investing in this country. Either Obama will bankrupt us all, or he simply wont keep his promises. I think the latter. So much for "The chosen one".

I agree.^

 

[JEWmongous]

As I said before, the Iraqi gov't wants ALL American soldiers to leave by 2011. That is a timeline, FYI. I don't know how long Republicans/John McCain wants to stay in Iraq but 2011 is only about 2 years away. We must remember we are occupying this country. We can only "stay the course" so long. I think some of these conservatives are living in a fantasy land that Iraq will one day be a new-age version of Japan (destroy the war machine, rewrite the constitution, and make them a major non-NATO ally). Yea, nice dream.

Will anything get much better over there without an increase in soldiers on the ground? No probably not. Is America going to increase the amount soldiers fighting in Iraq? NO WAY!!! Then, what are we doing just staying there without a proper number of soldiers or a clear cut goal??? Call the rest of the world crazy, but our "allies" who participated in this conflict are pretty much gone or in super small numbers. They were the smart ones. The british have the most troops after the US, and that is barely over 4,000 soldiers! This is OUR war, and most likely OUR failure that will go down in the history books. We are draining our military and billions of dollars on this country. Please tell me why. If it has to do with outposts of tryanny, dictators, evilness, etc...why the hell are we not in Darfur?????

 

[spooge]

1) McCain withdrew from the public finance matching funds system.

Instead of typing I will post the link: http://www.factcheck.org/askfactcheck/what_is_public_financing.html

2) Obama's average donation is $85...so, 605/85 = 7.12 million contributors to Obama...that seems like a lot of pissed off people. If McCain could connect with ordinary people, he would have that kind of loot and would use every piece of it to smash and trash Obama.

3) We are bankrupt now...lets have the otherside...with a proven positive economic influence...have a shot.

Resources for positive economic standing are:
http://www.gpoaccess.gov/indicators/index.html
http://www.economic-indicators.com/
http://www.nber.org/releases/

 

[Dmayor22]

Please note that the highest capital gains taxes were under Clinton from 94-98...please also note this time had the highest job growth numbers since the great depression...the lowest unemployment rate...the third strongest GDP numbers in our country's history...the highest percentage of people living and prospering in the middle class

That is a bit misleading Spooge to make statements like that. The capital gains taxes were higher under Clinton but even he cut them from 28% to 20% and then Bush cut them from 20% to 15%. It is regarded as fact that everytime the capital gains taxes were cut, revenue went for the government went up. Even Clinton realized that. And why do people always assume that if there are less people in the middle class it means they enter the poor class? The number of millionaires are growing each year. Maybe those people who left the middle class actually upgraded?

It also seems unfair to attribute the economic boom of the 90's to Clinton. He had absolutely no hand in the Dot Com era taking off. The best thing that can be said about Clinton's economy is that he didn't do anything to help or hurt it. he just went with the flow.

Bush is by no means a good president. but when it comes to the economy under him and Clinton here are some numbers to compare:

Inflation rate after 1st 3 years: Bush 1.93% Clinton 2.93%

Manufacturing has reached a 20 year high under bush
Foreign exports are up under bush

Poverty Rate under Clinton: 12.95%
Poverty Rate under Bush: 9.4%

The federal deficiet as a percent of the GDP is the same as it has been for decades.

Bill Clinton's unemployment rate when taken over both his terms is actually higher than Bush's.

The list goes on and on.

 

[MaseratiGT]

Is anyone else tired of crap like this? I spent more time trying to figure out what this "simplistic" message said with my online thesaurus, than I did studying last week. Maybe I am just a simpleton, but I would much rather have a discussion where neither person had to speak condescendingly to prove a point.

Apparently it does because you stopped arguing

MaseratiGT, I agree with some of your points. I think that you're right, this is our generations Vietnam, but we should learn from what did happen in Vietnam. Giving up and shipping home isn't a great idea, at least not with things the way they are. That is one of my big issues with Obama's foreign policy. There is certaintly merit in the argument that we shouldn't have gone into Iraq in the first place, but we have no choice in that now, we're there and can only deal with it how it is now. Spending all our time casting blame (and there is plenty to go around) won't get us out of this mess anymore than hoping for a change will. We need someone with a tough, aggressive foreign policy right now. When the main issue was foreign policy, Obama was losing. He handled the Georgia/Russia conflict like an amateur. Now that focus has been shifted to domestic affairs like the economy, he has been able to use that as a cover to hide his weaknesses. I hope that Joe Biden is wrong, that Barack Obama will not be tested with an international crisis in his first 6 months, because we can't afford for him to "still have his training wheels on." In my mind his economic policy is just as bad. Let me add here that I think McCains is not much better, but at least his policy involves some financial responsibility for the government, and not just a bigger checkbook with no money in the bank. As I said, I may be a simpleton, but that's how I see things.

I see your point. However, I won't type any other way. I'm not dumbing myself down to get a point across; especially when it has been a struggle to actually get my education. Mastery of the language is important to me.

What I meant in my previous post - using fallacies as a counter doesn't make me stop debating. It makes me stop debating with that one person.
I personally believe that that type of argument deserves no retort.

Now your arguments:
During the Cold War, analysts claimed that IF the United States were to pull out of Vietnam, the Domino Effect would occur, and ALL of the surrounding countries would turn red. Laos did turn as did Cambodia, which is not communist anymore. But I argue that they turned as a direct effect of American presence in the region. Pol Pot used scare tactics in his recruitment. The Cambodians listened because we were bombing them and using Agent Orange all over the place. So my point - The pullout in Vietnam didn't cause the Domino Effect. Americans in the region gave radical leaders opportunity to rally to their cause and implement extremist governments.
The same rhetoric is being used as a reason to stay in Iraq. Everyone will die in a massive nuclear war.
"The repercussions throughout the Middle East of the Sunni-Shiite clash in Iraq are potentially so large it's difficult to digest. Sunni Arabs in Egypt, Jordan, and Saudi Arabia will certainly view a hard-won and bloody Shiite triumph in Iraq as an enormous Iranian victory. The Egyptians or the Saudis or both will go for their own nukes. What little chance remains for the Americans and the Europeans to corral peacefully the clerical regime's nuclear-weapons aspirations will end with a Shiite-Sunni death struggle in Mesopotamia, which the Shia will inevitably win. The Israelis, who are increasingly likely to strike preemptively the major Iranian nuclear sites before the end of George Bush's presidency, will feel even more threatened, especially when the Iranian regime underscores its struggle against the Zionist enemy as a means of compensating for its support to the bloody Shiite conquest in Iraq. With America in full retreat from Iraq, the clerical regime, which has often viewed terrorism as a tool of statecraft, could well revert to the mentality and tactics that produced the bombing of Khobar Towers in 1996. If the Americans are retreating, hit them." - The Weekly Standardhttp://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/013/147ltxge.asp?pg=2

However, I side with former CIA chief, John Deutch, "The US should cut its losses, pull out of Iraq promptly and never again use its military might to build a nation according to its own values."http://www.forbes.com/home/feeds/afx/2005/07/15/afx2140520.html. Granted, the article is 3 years old, but how many lives (soldiers and Iraqi civilians) and how much money has been wasted in that time frame. Too much for me to stomach. Since the time of the article, Iraq has seen it's bloodiest months.
As for Biden's statement - No matter who would have been elected, they would face challenges. Iraq, Darfur, Afghanistan are all international crises that must be handled by our next president. To believe that McCain wouldn't have been "tested," in my opinion is unrealistic. But when pundits pull that one line from two speeches and slap it on a blank background, of course it sounds like Biden doesn't have faith. Because it is no longer in it's original context.

Sorry about the length. I look forward to reading your response.

 

[Feli]

...I look forward to reading your response.

Why would a response be needed? You talk war, war, war. You are against the US in Iraq. We get that. Public approval ratings for wars consistently start high and then steadily decline. That has been seen in every military battle the US has even taken part in, and the Obama campaign is looking to take full advantage of that fact. Every time someone brings up Obama's record spending, expensive promises, etc then the cop out from Obamicans, like the savior himself, is simply "we can get all my programs by only raising taxes on the rich and stopping the war." That sounds good, real good... good enough to get a lot of votes... whether it's actually true and feasible or not.

...I don't own several homes or have more than $250,000 in my savings account.

If I was super rich I would be voting for McCain....

... I think you need to be Republican only if you make over $250K ...

he is only going to raise taxes on ppl making more than 250k a year...

... afraid to pay taxes when you earn more than 250K...

"A government that robs Peter to pay Paul can always depend on the support of Paul."
-George Bernard Shaw

Personally, I'm not a military or intelligence commander on the ground in the mid east, so I think it's a bit presumptious for me to say whether or not we need to remain there. Obama has decided we don't... because he can't wait to spend that money (and lots of other tax money). Cutting military to increase social services is a classic dem move; not much changes.

...Getting back to topic (president and podiatry), there are other issues much more germane to our future profession. Socialized medicine is the topic of the front page story on SDN, and I think it's a pretty good summary. A single payer system allows the payer, the govt, to dictate what docs will get paid. If you want a lot of uninsured people to get coverage, then the pay per patient obviously has to decline. The aim is to basically put everyone on Medicare. In addition to taxing docs more, socialized medicine will now ensure that those greedy SOBs also get paid less. We may have to see how that works itself out. Just like continued decline of reimbursements on Medicare patients, I'd imagine that some docs will bend over and take it, most good physiscians will say "no way" - especially the younger ones who have record amounts of student debts. As a doctor, make no mistake: your name is definitely Peter to socialist leaders.

 

[MaseratiGT]

That is a bit misleading Spooge to make statements like that. The capital gains taxes were higher under Clinton but even he cut them from 28% to 20% and then Bush cut them from 20% to 15%. It is regarded as fact that everytime the capital gains taxes were cut, revenue went for the government went up. Even Clinton realized that. And why do people always assume that if there are less people in the middle class it means they enter the poor class? The number of millionaires are growing each year. Maybe those people who left the middle class actually upgraded?

It also seems unfair to attribute the economic boom of the 90's to Clinton. He had absolutely no hand in the Dot Com era taking off. The best thing that can be said about Clinton's economy is that he didn't do anything to help or hurt it. he just went with the flow.

Bush is by no means a good president. but when it comes to the economy under him and Clinton here are some numbers to compare:

Inflation rate after 1st 3 years: Bush 1.93% Clinton 2.93%

Manufacturing has reached a 20 year high under bush
Foreign exports are up under bush

Poverty Rate under Clinton: 12.95%
Poverty Rate under Bush: 9.4%

The federal deficiet as a percent of the GDP is the same as it has been for decades.

Bill Clinton's unemployment rate when taken over both his terms is actually higher than Bush's.

The list goes on and on.

I just wonder where you are getting your numbers from. I haven't checked out all of your statistics, but the Clinton administration had a massive issue with poverty. However, during his term, he had the LARGEST drop in poverty in decades. http://clinton5.nara.gov/WH/Accomplishments/eightyears-01.html.
According to The Census Bureau, the poverty level for 2007 was 12.5%.http://www.census.gov/Press-Release/www/releases/archives/income_wealth/012528.html

 

[ldsrmdude]

...Getting back to topic (president and podiatry), there are other issues much more germane to our future profession. Socialized medicine is the topic of the front page story on SDN, and I think it's a pretty good summary.

Back to topic? I think I actually forgot what the topic really was! This topic is actually an important one, so it is probably a good idea to get back to the presidency and podiatry (even though I was having such a good time straying off-topic). I'll go ahead and start another thread so that this one has a chance of staying on-topic. The SDN article is pretty good at pointing out both sides of the issue. The podiatrist I shadowed back home told me that if it comes down to a single-payer system, he is going to quit medicine and work in business where he can actually make money. Although I think he was being only partly serious, he is not alone in his dislike of a "Medicare for all" system. I don't think that either President will be able to change healthcare that drastically, but if they do, there will obviously be some fall out.

I just wonder where you are getting your numbers from. I haven't checked out all of your statistics, but the Clinton administration had a massive issue with poverty. However, during his term, he had the LARGEST drop in poverty in decades. http://clinton5.nara.gov/WH/Accomplishments/eightyears-01.html.
According to The Census Bureau, the poverty level for 2007 was 12.5%.http://www.census.gov/Press-Release/www/releases/archives/income_wealth/012528.html

I think that his numbers for poverty are averages over the terms of their presidency, but I could be wrong. Has anyone read State of Fear by Michael Chrichton? Before I get flamed for anything to do with global warming, I only bring it up because it shows how numbers can be manipulated to show many different things. Take the example about Clinton having the largest drop in poverty. To me that could mean that he had a 20% poverty level, and dropped it to 15%. That would be a big drop, but the poverty level could still be outrageously high.

 

[215512]

lol feli sure does enjoy his quoting feature

 

[JEWmongous]

lol feli sure does enjoy his quoting feature

Are you going to party Tuesday night? Cause I sure as hell am

 

[geoff325]

So the real question is Feli the smartest pod student in the world and doesnt need to study and can sit on SDN and write mini novels each day.....or is this an insight to the rigorous schedule of Barry....?

 

[165007]

So the real question is Feli the smartest pod student in the world and doesnt need to study and can sit on SDN and write mini novels each day.....or is this an insight to the rigorous schedule of Barry....?

WOW, Mr. prepod calling out a 4th year.

Do you know what the 4th years' schedules are like?

 

[JEWmongous]

WOW, Mr. prepod calling out a 4th year.

Do you know what the 4th years' schedules are like?

Well it depends if you're on externships (busting *ss in hospitals) or at local school clinics. I wouldn't imagine the school clinics to be as crazy or time consuming as the externships though.

 

[Feli]

So the real question is Feli the smartest pod student in the world and doesnt need to study and can sit on SDN and write mini novels each day.....or is this an insight to the rigorous schedule of Barry....?

4th year is pretty laid back at times, especially right now, when I have the month of Novemeber off. Like any pod student/resident who posts here, you will see there are times when I post a lot more/less based on my class and clinic schedules. A good point is made above that there is a big difference between a demanding 5a-7p clerkship (search my posts in May or Aug lol) and a 8a-4p school clinic.

You can't study all the time, and I think these issues are important. That's all.

 

[215512]

That is a bit misleading Spooge to make statements like that. The capital gains taxes were higher under Clinton but even he cut them from 28% to 20% and then Bush cut them from 20% to 15%. It is regarded as fact that everytime the capital gains taxes were cut, revenue went for the government went up. Even Clinton realized that. And why do people always assume that if there are less people in the middle class it means they enter the poor class? The number of millionaires are growing each year. Maybe those people who left the middle class actually upgraded?

It also seems unfair to attribute the economic boom of the 90's to Clinton. He had absolutely no hand in the Dot Com era taking off. The best thing that can be said about Clinton's economy is that he didn't do anything to help or hurt it. he just went with the flow.

Bush is by no means a good president. but when it comes to the economy under him and Clinton here are some numbers to compare:

Inflation rate after 1st 3 years: Bush 1.93% Clinton 2.93%

Manufacturing has reached a 20 year high under bush
Foreign exports are up under bush

Poverty Rate under Clinton: 12.95%
Poverty Rate under Bush: 9.4%

The federal deficiet as a percent of the GDP is the same as it has been for decades.

Bill Clinton's unemployment rate when taken over both his terms is actually higher than Bush's.

The list goes on and on.

honestly if this is the case then why is bush's approval rating at around 20%? is it because of the great job hes doing? everyone knows clinton was 1000000000000000 times better than the current drunken cowboy idiot that didnt even win the 2000 election but somehow pulled some corrupt strings to get in office. what a tool!

 

[JEWmongous]

honestly if this is the case then why is bush's approval rating at around 20%? is it because of the great job hes doing? everyone knows clinton was 1000000000000000 times better than the current drunken cowboy idiot that didnt even win the 2000 election but somehow pulled some corrupt strings to get in office. what a tool!

Don't worry brah, Tuesday will be our day. Even so, 2 months and that lame duck idiot is gone forever.

 

[215512]

Don't worry brah, Tuesday will be our day. Even so, 2 months and that lame duck idiot is gone forever.

its not over yet i just hope everyone gets out and votes obama and that whole bradley effect is a farce and not real...i hope!

If he does win holy crap im going to party the rest of the week!

 

[Feli]

...I respect McCain...

It's a good thing Obama does also...

[youtube]DnEhmbKazdw[/youtube]

Hmm, haven't we seen this strange mannerism before? Was it when he was talking about his wife and kids? Oh wait, here it is...

[youtube]YTJs0VRJLO8[/youtube]

Classy. Very classy.

 

[JEWmongous]

It's a good thing Obama does also...

[youtube]DnEhmbKazdw[/youtube]

Hmm, haven't we seen this strange mannerism before? Was it when he was talking about his wife and kids? Oh wait, here it is...

[youtube]YTJs0VRJLO8[/youtube]

Classy. Very classy.

Where did your banner go? Gave the nod to Obama already???

 

[215512]

Where did your banner go? Gave the nod to Obama already???

LOL

 

[215512]

lets hope everyone gets out the vote and has their vote COUNT this time around *ahem 2000 election ahem* may the best man win!

 

[Feli]

lets hope everyone gets out the vote...

Already did. It's an important election.

If nothing else, I'm sure glad I cancelled out this Florida woman's vote:

[YOUTUBE]P36x8rTb3jI[/YOUTUBE]

...Obama looooves to quote JFK, a great American president whom I own two biographies on, but I think Barack and his supporters sorely fail to grasp the famous speech/quote "ask not what your country can do for you; ask what you can do for your country."...

 

[215512]

Already did. It's an important election.

If nothing else, I'm sure glad I cancelled out this Florida woman's vote:

[youtube]P36x8rTb3jI[/youtube]

And I am sure glad that my vote cancelled out one of the racist rednecks that are completely ignorant and poorly represent your party

 

[Feli]

And I am sure glad that my vote cancelled out one of the racist rednecks that are completely ignorant and poorly represent your party

Yep... you gotta watch out for extremists...

[youtube]neGbKHyGuHU[/youtube]

 

[215512]

Yep... you gotta watch out for extremists...

[youtube]neGbKHyGuHU[/youtube]

it goes both ways buddy i just dont have the free time you do to go hunt for videos lol

 

[hamlinbeach]

Yep... you gotta watch out for extremists...

[youtube]neGbKHyGuHU[/youtube]

is that necessary? really?

 

[ldsrmdude]

is that necessary? really?

Was which part necessary? Calling members of the Black Panthers racist? Or the fact that they were standing outside a polling place with a night stick? I don't think it was necessary to stand outside the polling place with a club. Calling them racist might not have been necessary, but it wasn't lying, was it?

 

[hamlinbeach]

Was which part necessary? Calling members of the Black Panthers racist? Or the fact that they were standing outside a polling place with a night stick? I don't think it was necessary to stand outside the polling place with a club. Calling them racist might not have been necessary, but it wasn't lying, was it?

haha not necessary for black panthers or any radical group to stand outside of a polling place with a night stick.