What's up everybody! Just a quick message. We will be relaunching AllHipHop.com with the goal of keeping the community front and center. I have worked with Jamal and select moderators, to make sure The Illl Community's needs are being addressed as we evolve. We are encouraging you to use the new platform.

We will NOT be closing the current community, but we will be porting user data over to the new system over time, so please get used to using the new community!

We will be working on it every single day until it's exactly what you want!

Please feel free to join now, test, as we are in beta:

https://www.allhiphop.com

excuse me, but COLORADO JUST LEGALIZED WEED COLORADO JUST LEGALIZED WEED COLORADO JUST LEGALIZED WEE

13»

Replies

  • Jabu_RuleJabu_Rule Posts: 5,993 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited November 2012
    FuriousOne wrote: »
    FuriousOne wrote: »
    janklow wrote: »
    Swiffness! wrote: »
    lmao kingblaze sheeeit cuz, gary johnson? seriously? There something wrong with Jill Stein?
    yes, she's a fucking anti-gun fascist, so fuck Jill Stein. i'd rather vote for Obama.
    Swiffness! wrote: »
    What do you think Gary Johnson's economic policy would look like? You ever stop to think about that?
    wait, what the hell would Jill Stein's economic policy look like?
    Swiffness! wrote: »
    Libertarians are great on .... civil rights
    well, if it's a civil rights question and Romney and Obama (and fuck it, Stein) all suck on my civil rights issue...

    anyway, look, say you vote for Johnson and SOMEHOW JOHNSON WINS. it's still going to be Johnson versus a Congress who won't let him do anything CRAZY.

    Thanks for saving me the time. Gary Johnson isn't perfect but at a minimum, at least I wouldn't worry about the drunken sailor spending that will ruin this country in the future and our taxpayer dollars being spent needlessly around the world in wars as America has citizens struggling right here.

    More misinformation..
    http://www.nationalmemo.com/watch-what-led-us-to-the-fiscal-cliff/
    How did we get from nearly $6 trillion projected surpluses in 2001 to $6 trillion in new debt?

    As President Obama and Republican leaders in Congress square off on the debt-cutting measures that could send us over the fiscal cliff, “it’s crucial to remember the source of our deficit and debt. The Center for American Progress’ Michael Linden explains the laws passed during the Bush administration along with the wars and the bad economy over a decade made up 86 percent of the debt we’ve accumulated since 2001. President Obama’s spending and the stimulus are responsible for only 14 percent.

    Keep that in mind as Republicans demand concessions from the president and the middle class.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=LcvLHHMC4iI

    If the wars and Bush's laws have made up so much of the debt, why has Obama continued the war in Afghanistan to this very day, and why did he take so fucking long to end the war in Iraq? He's the commander in chief, he can COMMAND the military to withdraw from Afghanistan tomorrow if he wants to. The American people would have his back as well. We're losing in Afghanistan, we shouldn't be there anyway.....blaming Bush for everything is nice and cool, but Obama continuing with Bush's policies isn't smart at all. It's bankrupting the nation, and expanding the Bush tax cuts blew up the debt as well. I'm not gonna pretend to be happy with that.

    As i've pointed out too many times, he's actually spent far less then most presidents. His continuation of Afghanistan has nothing to do with the numbers that you keep ignoring. Blaming Bush for the things he's actually responsible for is what I'm doing whether you want to ignore facts or not. If you keep stating misinformation regarding spending, i will keep pointing out the truth of the matter. Btw, Obama has claimed his part of the expenditures that he continued from the Bush era even though some policies were forced through by threatening unemployment which you seem to have no issue with. Afghanistan was an attempt to take responsibility for a mess you caused by helping a people create a defense which the last president ignored (oops there i go again). Still that has shit all to do with the erroneous debt you keep putting putting on Obama.

    The Bush tax cuts contributed a lot to our current debt, and so is the war in Afghanistan which most people want done by now, these are not minor parts of the debt. He also took too long to end the war in Iraq, THESE are the issues that piss me off about Obama, whether Bush is mostly to blame or not, Obama has not been responsible with the nation's money supply. He should have fired Ben Bernanke a long time ago, he's printing money like there is no tmw and meanwhile, the worth of the dollar continues to become less and less. Is Obama's spending compared to Bush as bad, NO, I have stated this before. But considering the massive 16 trillion in debt this nation has, continuing a failed war in Afghanistan and extending the Bush tax cuts only helped to push America's future from bad to borderline catastrophic. Let's talk about Obama's spending and leave Bush out of this for a second, I already know Bush was a disaster. Obama has not been responsible spending money, 2 billion a week in Afghanistan is NOT fucking responsible when America has so many damn issues here.

    It's not just not as bad, it's not even close. Also, you still ignored why the Bush taxes were extended in the face of hostage negotiation. You also ignored the fact that the Afghanistan war was going to be continued when you cast your vote for him the first time even though he mentioned that as a goal. America's future was bought down to bad when it was already approaching borderline catastrophic. Obama saved this country from a depression that could have been far worse and most of the money he spent was on stimulating our economy by investing in America. The war spending was already allocated.

    http://csis.org/publication/us-cost-afghan-war-fy2002-fy2013
    The resulting figures provide important insights for “transition.” They show the scale of past US efforts, how the aid has been allocated, and the differences between the total aid appropriated during the course of the war, the amount obligated (around 60% of the amount appropriated), and the amount actually disbursed (around 45% of the appropriation).

    The dollar dropped in value because Bush policies, and congressional inaction. But it's all Obama's fault for not shitting on the constitution by sidelining congress right? We are approaching yet another hostage negotiation with he fiscal cliff with Congress ready to hold hostages once again. Congress is not only playing games with our debt, but they aren't passing legislation to solve that problem. But of course the God Obama should wave his magic wand and smite them i suppose.
    beyonce-jay-z-blue-ivy-bikes-7e423fe2-53e3-4784-9386-73b60ac360f5.jpg
  • kingblaze84kingblaze84 Bronx, NY birthplace of hip-hopPosts: 14,288 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited November 2012
    Furiousone......

    I am very aware the Bush tax cuts were extended, according to Obama, to protect unemployment insurance. Here is the problem with that though, IT BLEW UP THE DEBT. I do sympathize with those who are unemployed and need the unemployment insurance, but spending our grand children's future is not the answer. Extending the Bush tax cuts was way too expensive and so is the war in Afghanistan. From your own link, it states that the bulk of the Afghan war spending was ALLOCATED IN 2009, when Obama was prez.....and yes I did vote for Obama in 2008 but I expected him to use common sense when it comes to war spending, considering how badly we are in debt. Joe Biden wanted less forces used, while Obama foolishly chose Hilary Clinton's path of increasing the amount of troops in there. As the link states:

    The bulk of the total spending and aid has been allocated since FY2009, and came after the insurgency had reached high levels. It is a clear case of too much, too late.


    IN EITHER CASE, Obama signed the contract with the corrupt prez of Afghanistan that states American troops will be in Afghanistan until about 2025, this is a fucking disaster because it means troops will be shot at there for another 13 years at least. WTF was Obama thinking signing that contract? And making matters worse, Obama still doesn't have a real plan to fix the economy, aside from MORE deficit spending lol.....he needs to tell the feds to stop cracking down on medical marijuana and recreational marijuana in states that have it legalized. Until than, I won't pretend to like Obama's policies, although I do applaud him for not being as bad as Romney, which isn't saying much.
  • kingblaze84kingblaze84 Bronx, NY birthplace of hip-hopPosts: 14,288 ✭✭✭✭✭
    A great article I think Obama and pretty much everyone should read....

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/doug-bandow/the-most-important-electi_b_2135085.html

    Here is a part of it.....

    Over Washington's steadfast opposition 17 states eliminated penalties for use of marijuana as a medical treatment: Alaska, Arizona, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Maine, Massachusetts, Michigan, Montana, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, Oregon, Rhode Island and Vermont. The District of Columbia did so as well. Last week voters in Massachusetts and Montana approved medical marijuana initiatives while one in Arkansas barely failed, winning 49 percent of the vote.

    The federal government resisted all of these efforts. Various "drug czars" have wandered the nation campaigning against both legislative proposals and popular initiatives to relax legal penalties. And presidents have pursued the Drug War with full ferocity, shutting down marijuana dispensaries legal under state law and threatening landlords who rent to pot suppliers. Even one-time druggie Barack Obama sacrificed his liberal principles to toss people in jail for doing what he did when he was their age.

    This policy is impossible to defend in a free society. Marijuana smoking is unhealthy. So is cigarette smoking. And alcohol use. And eating sugar. People who ride motorcycles, climb mountains and hang glide sometimes die. Every day life involves varying risks and trade-offs. Such judgments are best left with individuals and families, not the government, whether federal or state.

    ---Let's hope there will come a day when Obama and others can stop being a slave to pharmaceutical companies. Time to improve the American economy and stop thinking in the past.
  • ShencotheMCShencotheMC KING Posts: 26,051 ✭✭✭✭✭
    lol this dude Kingblaze hates Obama's guts. At what point did he spit in your cereal my g?
  • janklowjanklow god's lonely man. Posts: 8,613 Regulator
    FuriousOne wrote: »
    Also, you still ignored why the Bush taxes were extended in the face of hostage negotiation.
    the vast majority of the Bush tax cuts are not cuts Obama is in theory opposed to, since he maintains he wants to repeal only the ones that apply to the highest earners. so does he not deserve "credit" for the ones he actively wants to keep?

  • kingblaze84kingblaze84 Bronx, NY birthplace of hip-hopPosts: 14,288 ✭✭✭✭✭
    lol this dude Kingblaze hates Obama's guts. At what point did he spit in your cereal my g?

    Don't hate anyone lol but yeah I really don't like many of his policies.....
  • Jabu_RuleJabu_Rule Posts: 5,993 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited November 2012
    janklow wrote: »
    FuriousOne wrote: »
    Also, you still ignored why the Bush taxes were extended in the face of hostage negotiation.
    the vast majority of the Bush tax cuts are not cuts Obama is in theory opposed to, since he maintains he wants to repeal only the ones that apply to the highest earners. so does he not deserve "credit" for the ones he actively wants to keep?

    Yes, i have to remember to say 'Tax cuts for the Rich'.. But i do recall Obama increasing tax cuts for Middle class with the stimulus, so he already claimed those as his own.
    beyonce-jay-z-blue-ivy-bikes-7e423fe2-53e3-4784-9386-73b60ac360f5.jpg
  • Jabu_RuleJabu_Rule Posts: 5,993 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited November 2012
    Furiousone......

    I am very aware the Bush tax cuts were extended, according to Obama, to protect unemployment insurance. Here is the problem with that though, IT BLEW UP THE DEBT. I do sympathize with those who are unemployed and need the unemployment insurance, but spending our grand children's future is not the answer. Extending the Bush tax cuts was way too expensive and so is the war in Afghanistan. From your own link, it states that the bulk of the Afghan war spending was ALLOCATED IN 2009, when Obama was prez.....and yes I did vote for Obama in 2008 but I expected him to use common sense when it comes to war spending, considering how badly we are in debt. Joe Biden wanted less forces used, while Obama foolishly chose Hilary Clinton's path of increasing the amount of troops in there. As the link states:

    The bulk of the total spending and aid has been allocated since FY2009, and came after the insurgency had reached high levels. It is a clear case of too much, too late.


    IN EITHER CASE, Obama signed the contract with the corrupt prez of Afghanistan that states American troops will be in Afghanistan until about 2025, this is a fucking disaster because it means troops will be shot at there for another 13 years at least. WTF was Obama thinking signing that contract? And making matters worse, Obama still doesn't have a real plan to fix the economy, aside from MORE deficit spending lol.....he needs to tell the feds to stop cracking down on medical marijuana and recreational marijuana in states that have it legalized. Until than, I won't pretend to like Obama's policies, although I do applaud him for not being as bad as Romney, which isn't saying much.


    If you give me an alternative way that Obama could have gotten around the Bush tax cuts for the Rich, then i'll agree that he could have done something beyond his constitutional powers that wouldn't cause a scandal. Those were still pre-allocated funds regardless. It also indicates a return to the core focus of why we were there in the fist place. The fact that we were asked for help by a corrupt official (as opposed to the school girl murdering Taliban), and didn't roll in there as liberators half cocked, is a plus. I have no problem with aiding in stabilizing a country we destroyed at a reduced cost. Bottom line, he said he would increase the troops and did and you voted with that knowledge.

    We have to worry about our future relatives and ourselves currently and both can be done. Our future relatives will have to do the same and we have survived as a species regardless economic setbacks. It's already been proven that Obama's stimulus and other measures helped the economy. He didn't say anything about weed yet, but I'm hoping on the same things you are. Making it legal to eliminate the violence and prison time is my only concern.

    There are many ways to stimulate the economy and 4 years is hardly going to eliminate the damage of the Great Recession which is why the stimulus was enacted in the first place. Letting certain business fail all at once, and putting unemployment dollars at risk would only exacerbate our economic woes far more then the Bush taxes for the Rich.
    beyonce-jay-z-blue-ivy-bikes-7e423fe2-53e3-4784-9386-73b60ac360f5.jpg
  • kingblaze84kingblaze84 Bronx, NY birthplace of hip-hopPosts: 14,288 ✭✭✭✭✭
    FuriousOne wrote: »
    Furiousone......

    I am very aware the Bush tax cuts were extended, according to Obama, to protect unemployment insurance. Here is the problem with that though, IT BLEW UP THE DEBT. I do sympathize with those who are unemployed and need the unemployment insurance, but spending our grand children's future is not the answer. Extending the Bush tax cuts was way too expensive and so is the war in Afghanistan. From your own link, it states that the bulk of the Afghan war spending was ALLOCATED IN 2009, when Obama was prez.....and yes I did vote for Obama in 2008 but I expected him to use common sense when it comes to war spending, considering how badly we are in debt. Joe Biden wanted less forces used, while Obama foolishly chose Hilary Clinton's path of increasing the amount of troops in there. As the link states:

    The bulk of the total spending and aid has been allocated since FY2009, and came after the insurgency had reached high levels. It is a clear case of too much, too late.


    IN EITHER CASE, Obama signed the contract with the corrupt prez of Afghanistan that states American troops will be in Afghanistan until about 2025, this is a fucking disaster because it means troops will be shot at there for another 13 years at least. WTF was Obama thinking signing that contract? And making matters worse, Obama still doesn't have a real plan to fix the economy, aside from MORE deficit spending lol.....he needs to tell the feds to stop cracking down on medical marijuana and recreational marijuana in states that have it legalized. Until than, I won't pretend to like Obama's policies, although I do applaud him for not being as bad as Romney, which isn't saying much.


    If you give me an alternative way that Obama could have gotten around the Bush tax cuts for the Rich, then i'll agree that he could have done something beyond his constitutional powers that wouldn't cause a scandal. Those were still pre-allocated funds regardless. It also indicates a return to the core focus of why we were there in the fist place. The fact that we were asked for help by a corrupt official (as opposed to the school girl murdering Taliban), and didn't roll in there as liberators half cocked, is a plus. I have no problem with aiding in stabilizing a country we destroyed at a reduced cost. Bottom line, he said he would increase the troops and did and you voted with that knowledge.

    We have to worry about our future relatives and ourselves currently and both can be done. Our future relatives will have to do the same and we have survived as a species regardless economic setbacks. It's already been proven that Obama's stimulus and other measures helped the economy. He didn't say anything about weed yet, but I'm hoping on the same things you are. Making it legal to eliminate the violence and prison time is my only concern.

    There are many ways to stimulate the economy and 4 years is hardly going to eliminate the damage of the Great Recession which is why the stimulus was enacted in the first place. Letting certain business fail all at once, and putting unemployment dollars at risk would only exacerbate our economic woes far more then the Bush taxes for the Rich.

    He said he would increase the troops in Afghanistan but AGAIN, he should have used common sense when it comes to Afghanistan, Joe Biden suggested decreasing troops and increasing special forces to root out the Taliban and Al-Qaeda. We now see Obama's policy in Afghanistan is failing completely, little to no good is going on there now. If you tell me things in Afghanistan are going well I will respectfully end this conversation. We will never agree when it comes to the waste of time known as the Afghan war, most Americans want us out of there now anyway, it's time to listen to the people and end it. It's obvious we won't agree on this issue LOL, no one will ever convince me the war is worth being fought, it started off as a good fight but we've obviously overstayed our welcome. It's too fucking expensive and it's one of the reasons Obama got 10 million less votes compared to 2008.

    As far as the Bush tax cuts, Obama should not have caved in, you see how hard a time Republicans are giving him now right? Once they saw him cave on that, they figured he'd cave like a bitch again, and I'm willing to bet he will again. The Bush tax cuts were set to expire, and Democrats were ready to let it expire but Obama caving in just made the debt worse.

    In regards to marijuana, I'm glad you agree with me on that. Why do you think Obama is such a coward on this issue?
  • Jabu_RuleJabu_Rule Posts: 5,993 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited November 2012
    FuriousOne wrote: »
    Furiousone......

    I am very aware the Bush tax cuts were extended, according to Obama, to protect unemployment insurance. Here is the problem with that though, IT BLEW UP THE DEBT. I do sympathize with those who are unemployed and need the unemployment insurance, but spending our grand children's future is not the answer. Extending the Bush tax cuts was way too expensive and so is the war in Afghanistan. From your own link, it states that the bulk of the Afghan war spending was ALLOCATED IN 2009, when Obama was prez.....and yes I did vote for Obama in 2008 but I expected him to use common sense when it comes to war spending, considering how badly we are in debt. Joe Biden wanted less forces used, while Obama foolishly chose Hilary Clinton's path of increasing the amount of troops in there. As the link states:

    The bulk of the total spending and aid has been allocated since FY2009, and came after the insurgency had reached high levels. It is a clear case of too much, too late.


    IN EITHER CASE, Obama signed the contract with the corrupt prez of Afghanistan that states American troops will be in Afghanistan until about 2025, this is a fucking disaster because it means troops will be shot at there for another 13 years at least. WTF was Obama thinking signing that contract? And making matters worse, Obama still doesn't have a real plan to fix the economy, aside from MORE deficit spending lol.....he needs to tell the feds to stop cracking down on medical marijuana and recreational marijuana in states that have it legalized. Until than, I won't pretend to like Obama's policies, although I do applaud him for not being as bad as Romney, which isn't saying much.

    If you give me an alternative way that Obama could have gotten around the Bush tax cuts for the Rich, then i'll agree that he could have done something beyond his constitutional powers that wouldn't cause a scandal. Those were still pre-allocated funds regardless. It also indicates a return to the core focus of why we were there in the fist place. The fact that we were asked for help by a corrupt official (as opposed to the school girl murdering Taliban), and didn't roll in there as liberators half cocked, is a plus. I have no problem with aiding in stabilizing a country we destroyed at a reduced cost. Bottom line, he said he would increase the troops and did and you voted with that knowledge.

    We have to worry about our future relatives and ourselves currently and both can be done. Our future relatives will have to do the same and we have survived as a species regardless economic setbacks. It's already been proven that Obama's stimulus and other measures helped the economy. He didn't say anything about weed yet, but I'm hoping on the same things you are. Making it legal to eliminate the violence and prison time is my only concern.

    There are many ways to stimulate the economy and 4 years is hardly going to eliminate the damage of the Great Recession which is why the stimulus was enacted in the first place. Letting certain business fail all at once, and putting unemployment dollars at risk would only exacerbate our economic woes far more then the Bush taxes for the Rich.

    He said he would increase the troops in Afghanistan but AGAIN, he should have used common sense when it comes to Afghanistan, Joe Biden suggested decreasing troops and increasing special forces to root out the Taliban and Al-Qaeda. We now see Obama's policy in Afghanistan is failing completely, little to no good is going on there now. If you tell me things in Afghanistan are going well I will respectfully end this conversation. We will never agree when it comes to the waste of time known as the Afghan war, most Americans want us out of there now anyway, it's time to listen to the people and end it. It's obvious we won't agree on this issue LOL, no one will ever convince me the war is worth being fought, it started off as a good fight but we've obviously overstayed our welcome. It's too fucking expensive and it's one of the reasons Obama got 10 million less votes compared to 2008.

    As far as the Bush tax cuts, Obama should not have caved in, you see how hard a time Republicans are giving him now right? Once they saw him cave on that, they figured he'd cave like a bitch again, and I'm willing to bet he will again. The Bush tax cuts were set to expire, and Democrats were ready to let it expire but Obama caving in just made the debt worse.

    In regards to marijuana, I'm glad you agree with me on that. Why do you think Obama is such a coward on this issue?

    I know you will never agree with a war against an enemy that attacked our people and a group that harbored them and would allow them free reign to plot again. I think that this is a long game that is meant to aid in growing the stabilization of Afghanistan with far less American troops. I ask again, what could Obama or the outnumbered democrats do to avoid millions of people loosing their unemployment vs tax cuts that while bad, wouldn't cause nearly as much damage?

    I think Obama may just not like Marijuana if you can believe that. He was a young college student when he last smoked so his ideals aren't the same. His evidence seems to be the increasing potency of marijuana which has risk for addiction. If not physical, mental addiction and potential mental damage is real especially with these higher grades. I've seen people in support groups for marijuana because something has them attached and that shit is an expensive habit. I smoke and would like to see social programs to combat mental addiction rather then criminal penalty. It's nowhere as dangerous as other drugs so i hate when people attempt to say legalize it all like motherfuckers should be allowed to buy crack over the counter.

    beyonce-jay-z-blue-ivy-bikes-7e423fe2-53e3-4784-9386-73b60ac360f5.jpg
  • janklowjanklow god's lonely man. Posts: 8,613 Regulator
    FuriousOne wrote: »
    Yes, i have to remember to say 'Tax cuts for the Rich'.. But i do recall Obama increasing tax cuts for Middle class with the stimulus, so he already claimed those as his own.
    ultimately my beef with the administration on this issue is that when they're talking up their help for the non-rich, they start to own the tax cuts ... but then when we talk about the economic effects of those tax cuts, they're always Bush-installed. but i'm negative like that.
    kingblaze84
  • kingblaze84kingblaze84 Bronx, NY birthplace of hip-hopPosts: 14,288 ✭✭✭✭✭
    janklow wrote: »
    FuriousOne wrote: »
    Yes, i have to remember to say 'Tax cuts for the Rich'.. But i do recall Obama increasing tax cuts for Middle class with the stimulus, so he already claimed those as his own.
    ultimately my beef with the administration on this issue is that when they're talking up their help for the non-rich, they start to own the tax cuts ... but then when we talk about the economic effects of those tax cuts, they're always Bush-installed. but i'm negative like that.

    Exactly, we have to be honest as a country and say we can no longer afford these tax cuts.
  • Jabu_RuleJabu_Rule Posts: 5,993 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited November 2012
    janklow wrote: »
    FuriousOne wrote: »
    Yes, i have to remember to say 'Tax cuts for the Rich'.. But i do recall Obama increasing tax cuts for Middle class with the stimulus, so he already claimed those as his own.
    ultimately my beef with the administration on this issue is that when they're talking up their help for the non-rich, they start to own the tax cuts ... but then when we talk about the economic effects of those tax cuts, they're always Bush-installed. but i'm negative like that.

    Obama has actually said recently that he is willing to cut it all if a deal can't be reached to increase them on people making over a certain amount. But still technically, he did extend taxes for the middle class with his very own tax plan aside from bush's efforts that was created during the stimulus program. He obviously doesn't consider tax cuts for the Middle Class as a negative effect on the economy but rather the tax cuts that aided the Rich far more then anyone else with no trickle down benefit. Still they were created during the Bush era and that is the portion he wants gone.

    @kingblaze84, weren't you talking about bailing out Americans? Are you now saying taxes should be increased for everyone?

    You guys do no that they tax cuts have differing affects in different income levels right?
    http://www.dailyfinance.com/2011/06/14/the-high-cost-to-the-middle-class-of-low-taxes-on-the-rich/
    beyonce-jay-z-blue-ivy-bikes-7e423fe2-53e3-4784-9386-73b60ac360f5.jpg
  • kingblaze84kingblaze84 Bronx, NY birthplace of hip-hopPosts: 14,288 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited November 2012
    FuriousOne wrote: »
    janklow wrote: »
    FuriousOne wrote: »
    Yes, i have to remember to say 'Tax cuts for the Rich'.. But i do recall Obama increasing tax cuts for Middle class with the stimulus, so he already claimed those as his own.
    ultimately my beef with the administration on this issue is that when they're talking up their help for the non-rich, they start to own the tax cuts ... but then when we talk about the economic effects of those tax cuts, they're always Bush-installed. but i'm negative like that.

    Obama has actually said recently that he is willing to cut it all if a deal can't be reached to increase them on people making over a certain amount. But still technically, he did extend taxes for the middle class with his very own tax plan aside from bush's efforts that was created during the stimulus program. He obviously doesn't consider tax cuts for the Middle Class as a negative effect on the economy but rather the tax cuts that aided the Rich far more then anyone else with no trickle down benefit. Still they were created during the Bush era and that is the portion he wants gone.

    @kingblaze84, weren't you talking about bailing out Americans? Are you now saying taxes should be increased for everyone?

    You guys do no that they tax cuts have differing affects in different income levels right?
    http://www.dailyfinance.com/2011/06/14/the-high-cost-to-the-middle-class-of-low-taxes-on-the-rich/

    I do want bailouts for Americans, but the tax cuts are too expensive. If we're going to be serious about paying down the deficit, we have to end the constant tax cuts. I can forgive the tax cuts staying for the middle class, but realistically speaking, if we're going to pay down the debt, tax cuts for everyone must end. Otherwise, say hello to more inflation. If this is okay with you, please say so.

    This is why I am so adamant against the expensive ass war in Afghanistan, we can save some of that money to help out the working and middle class. If the feds stop being dickheads on marijuana, states would see more growth from the marijuana industry and create more jobs, and then more tax revenues. I understand Obama may just not like marijuana, but the time to be narrow minded in the absence of new ideas to improve the economy is over.
  • Jabu_RuleJabu_Rule Posts: 5,993 ✭✭✭✭✭
    FuriousOne wrote: »
    janklow wrote: »
    FuriousOne wrote: »
    Yes, i have to remember to say 'Tax cuts for the Rich'.. But i do recall Obama increasing tax cuts for Middle class with the stimulus, so he already claimed those as his own.
    ultimately my beef with the administration on this issue is that when they're talking up their help for the non-rich, they start to own the tax cuts ... but then when we talk about the economic effects of those tax cuts, they're always Bush-installed. but i'm negative like that.

    Obama has actually said recently that he is willing to cut it all if a deal can't be reached to increase them on people making over a certain amount. But still technically, he did extend taxes for the middle class with his very own tax plan aside from bush's efforts that was created during the stimulus program. He obviously doesn't consider tax cuts for the Middle Class as a negative effect on the economy but rather the tax cuts that aided the Rich far more then anyone else with no trickle down benefit. Still they were created during the Bush era and that is the portion he wants gone.

    @kingblaze84, weren't you talking about bailing out Americans? Are you now saying taxes should be increased for everyone?

    You guys do no that they tax cuts have differing affects in different income levels right?
    http://www.dailyfinance.com/2011/06/14/the-high-cost-to-the-middle-class-of-low-taxes-on-the-rich/

    I do want bailouts for Americans, but the tax cuts are too expensive. If we're going to be serious about paying down the deficit, we have to end the constant tax cuts. I can forgive the tax cuts staying for the middle class, but realistically speaking, if we're going to pay down the debt, tax cuts for everyone must end. Otherwise, say hello to more inflation. If this is okay with you, please say so.

    This is why I am so adamant against the expensive ass war in Afghanistan, we can save some of that money to help out the working and middle class. If the feds stop being dickheads on marijuana, states would see more growth from the marijuana industry and create more jobs, and then more tax revenues. I understand Obama may just not like marijuana, but the time to be narrow minded in the absence of new ideas to improve the economy is over.

    That is one of the options that he offered. More taxes for rich or more taxes for everyone. But at a time where the middle class is suffering the most, increasing their taxes will only hurt consumer spending even further which in turn will threaten the economy far more. Jobs don't come out of thin air. You have invest to create industries for jobs. The Rich don't need more breaks and they got far more direct benefit from tax breaks then the middle class did. I can't argue your idea about taxing weed. I think alcohol is far more dangerous but that doesn't mean people can't enjoy it properly. . Still, he hasn't said anything yet so we'll have to see what goes down.
    beyonce-jay-z-blue-ivy-bikes-7e423fe2-53e3-4784-9386-73b60ac360f5.jpg
  • kingblaze84kingblaze84 Bronx, NY birthplace of hip-hopPosts: 14,288 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Interesting words from Cornel West on Obama......

    http://mto.mediatakeout.com/external/59582

    Cornel West has made it clear that he feels that President Obama should be more proactive in tackling issues like poverty and the prison-industrial complex. Some African Americans see the professor's views as divisive, while others say he's speaking truth to power. Recently, in an interview with Democracy Now, West and Tavis Smiley were asked about the president's priorities, and while Smiley said Americans must encourage the POTUS to be the best he can be, West was much more critical, writes the Atlanta Daily World.

    "I think that it's morally obscene and spiritually profane to spend $6 billion on an election, $2 billion on a presidential election, and not have any serious discussion -- poverty, trade unions being pushed against the wall dealing with stagnating and declining wages when profits are still up and the 1 percent are doing very well, no talk about drones dropping bombs on innocent people. So we end up with such a narrow, truncated political discourse, as the major problems -- ecological catastrophe, climate change, global warming. So it's very sad. I mean, I'm glad there was not a right-wing takeover, but we end up with a Republican, a Rockefeller Republican in blackface, with Barack Obama, so that our struggle with regard to poverty intensifies" ...


    Responding to Dyson's statement that President Obama was "progressive," both Smiley and West said that President Obama is not, because to be progressive means taking risks, something that the president has not done.

    "In the president's forward motion in the second term to establish a legacy -- and I don't think that being president ought to be about a legacy; it ought to be about advancing the best for the American people. But in this conversation about his legacy, I want to see what risk he's going to take. Is he going to put himself on the line for poor people? Is he going have an honest conversation about drones? As Doc said earlier, you know, is he ever going to say the word prison -- the phrase, "prison-industrial complex"? Reagan wouldn't say "AIDS." Bush wouldn't say "climate change." Will Obama say "prison-industrial complex"? I mean, I want to know where the risk is that equates to being the most progressive president ever. That's the -- I don't get that."
  • kingblaze84kingblaze84 Bronx, NY birthplace of hip-hopPosts: 14,288 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited November 2012
    FuriousOne wrote: »
    FuriousOne wrote: »
    janklow wrote: »
    FuriousOne wrote: »
    Yes, i have to remember to say 'Tax cuts for the Rich'.. But i do recall Obama increasing tax cuts for Middle class with the stimulus, so he already claimed those as his own.
    ultimately my beef with the administration on this issue is that when they're talking up their help for the non-rich, they start to own the tax cuts ... but then when we talk about the economic effects of those tax cuts, they're always Bush-installed. but i'm negative like that.

    Obama has actually said recently that he is willing to cut it all if a deal can't be reached to increase them on people making over a certain amount. But still technically, he did extend taxes for the middle class with his very own tax plan aside from bush's efforts that was created during the stimulus program. He obviously doesn't consider tax cuts for the Middle Class as a negative effect on the economy but rather the tax cuts that aided the Rich far more then anyone else with no trickle down benefit. Still they were created during the Bush era and that is the portion he wants gone.

    @kingblaze84, weren't you talking about bailing out Americans? Are you now saying taxes should be increased for everyone?

    You guys do no that they tax cuts have differing affects in different income levels right?
    http://www.dailyfinance.com/2011/06/14/the-high-cost-to-the-middle-class-of-low-taxes-on-the-rich/

    I do want bailouts for Americans, but the tax cuts are too expensive. If we're going to be serious about paying down the deficit, we have to end the constant tax cuts. I can forgive the tax cuts staying for the middle class, but realistically speaking, if we're going to pay down the debt, tax cuts for everyone must end. Otherwise, say hello to more inflation. If this is okay with you, please say so.

    This is why I am so adamant against the expensive ass war in Afghanistan, we can save some of that money to help out the working and middle class. If the feds stop being dickheads on marijuana, states would see more growth from the marijuana industry and create more jobs, and then more tax revenues. I understand Obama may just not like marijuana, but the time to be narrow minded in the absence of new ideas to improve the economy is over.

    That is one of the options that he offered. More taxes for rich or more taxes for everyone. But at a time where the middle class is suffering the most, increasing their taxes will only hurt consumer spending even further which in turn will threaten the economy far more. Jobs don't come out of thin air. You have invest to create industries for jobs. The Rich don't need more breaks and they got far more direct benefit from tax breaks then the middle class did. I can't argue your idea about taxing weed. I think alcohol is far more dangerous but that doesn't mean people can't enjoy it properly. . Still, he hasn't said anything yet so we'll have to see what goes down.

    I can understand why a politician like Obama wouldn't want to raise taxes on the middle class and working class now, but he has to be tough on raising taxes on the rich now, no more being a coward as I'm used to him being. In regards to weed, we shall see how much the pharmaceutical industry has bought him off. Personally, I think Obama will continue to George W Bush his way to the end of his 2nd term. The budget cuts that will take place in January will be fascinating......
  • janklowjanklow god's lonely man. Posts: 8,613 Regulator
    FuriousOne wrote: »
    But still technically, he did extend taxes for the middle class with his very own tax plan aside from bush's efforts that was created during the stimulus program. He obviously doesn't consider tax cuts for the Middle Class as a negative effect on the economy but rather the tax cuts that aided the Rich far more then anyone else with no trickle down benefit.
    okay, but let me state this differently.

    when we talk about the "Bush tax cuts," i presume we're talking about the entire package of cuts Bush brought to the table, since as a whole, they're stated to have negatively impacted the US budget. but when you take out the tax cuts for the rich, the tax cuts go from costing us something like 3 trillion to something like 2 trillion. yet Obama/Democrats/whoever do not like do admit "we're cool with Bush-era tax cuts that theoretically cost us a couple trillion bucks" while they DO like to bitch about Bush killing the budget and jacking the national debt up. i feel --and hey, this is my opinion-- that you shouldn't get to bitch about the negative effect of the Bush tax cuts if you're leaving two-thirds of them in effect.
  • Jabu_RuleJabu_Rule Posts: 5,993 ✭✭✭✭✭
    janklow wrote: »
    FuriousOne wrote: »
    But still technically, he did extend taxes for the middle class with his very own tax plan aside from bush's efforts that was created during the stimulus program. He obviously doesn't consider tax cuts for the Middle Class as a negative effect on the economy but rather the tax cuts that aided the Rich far more then anyone else with no trickle down benefit.
    okay, but let me state this differently.

    when we talk about the "Bush tax cuts," i presume we're talking about the entire package of cuts Bush brought to the table, since as a whole, they're stated to have negatively impacted the US budget. but when you take out the tax cuts for the rich, the tax cuts go from costing us something like 3 trillion to something like 2 trillion. yet Obama/Democrats/whoever do not like do admit "we're cool with Bush-era tax cuts that theoretically cost us a couple trillion bucks" while they DO like to bitch about Bush killing the budget and jacking the national debt up. i feel --and hey, this is my opinion-- that you shouldn't get to bitch about the negative effect of the Bush tax cuts if you're leaving two-thirds of them in effect.

    You can indeed bitch about a portion of those tax cuts which the Rich benefit from without need. There is a differing impact to those making over a certain amount which at some point adds no benefit to society being that they aren't hording while the middle class reinvest in America. If you feel a portion of those taxes add positive effect to the economy and benefit Americans and in turn America, then you can indeed be vocal about that. You overlooked the fact that. You don't actually have to appreciate all of the tax cuts that Bush implemented and yes it is political gamesmanship to mention his name, but he did implement cuts above a certain income that Obama would not have supported other then to be forced to at risk of loosing unemployment.
    beyonce-jay-z-blue-ivy-bikes-7e423fe2-53e3-4784-9386-73b60ac360f5.jpg
  • janklowjanklow god's lonely man. Posts: 8,613 Regulator
    FuriousOne wrote: »
    You can indeed bitch about a portion of those tax cuts which the Rich benefit from without need.
    which completely misses the point, and has nothing to do with me overlooking the specific reason why you're cool with taxing the rich more. what i am actually talking about is bashing "the Bush tax cuts" for their total impact on the budget/debt while not mentioning that you're cool with the effect of 2/3 of those cuts when you talk about how Bush wrecked the budget/debt. waving it away as political gamesmanship overlooks the fact that what i am criticizing IS the political gamesmanship.
  • There is no way for this to be a bad ting, it is going to happen reguardless of law enforcment. The criminal element has the market. Take that away, tax it moderate and control the quality.
    kingblaze84
  • -Slim--Slim- Posts: 28
    They legalized it so people up there would stop being so paranoid over when the next shooting would happen.
    Plutarch
  • Soloman_The_WiseSoloman_The_Wise The Make It Happen Man... Puget SoundPosts: 2,817 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Beautiful, I will seriously consider moving to Colorado or Washington in the future. Now let's see if the federal govt will still crack down on this (one of the reasons I voted Gary Johnson president tonight)
    we got the best here ask any buddy that travels the west coast even Cali Rappers come here for the goods...

    The world Don't Understand Me, We are Living in Insanity, When I speak Profanity, It helps me Feed My Family, They Try and Banish Me, Because they Fear what I say, Spit Knowledge to the youth, Truth shows another way...

    Originally Posted by south4life

    "I'm not a drug dealer but, I'm cool with alot of street niggas...
    cause they respect the fact that I'm real with them, I'm not trying to be something I ain't.
    I'm cool with alot of street niggas here too cause, I come off as just being me and when I see them I holla and keep it moving. That's what's wrong with everybody now, they make being a gangsta or thug as the benchmark of being real. U know what's real, a nigga working a 9 to 5, busting his ass everyday without having to break a law."

    The world Don't Understand Me, We are Living in Insanity, When I speak Profanity, It helps me Feed My Family, They Try and Banish Me, Because they Fear what I say, Spit Knowledge to the youth, Truth shows a better way...

    I do not hate White People, Hell I regularly enjoy many White Women intimately, But I cannot stand Wiggers, RedNecks, or any Fag White Boys that do not Know there Place in shit...
  • mc317mc317 Chief Of Goddamn Station Dark Side of The MoonPosts: 5,548 ✭✭✭✭✭


    Cold Sardines Cold Sardines fuck em and feed em Cold Sardines
13»
Sign In or Register to comment.