So that's it for the election.

[hatelore bloodlust]

And furthermore , I live in city with the best economy in the nation. And it isn't looking to swell here dude. I see a ton more homeless on the street, and I know many who have given up nearly after seeking a job for the last 6 months. You need to hit the pipe some more alarti and go back to la la land.

[Ravager]

Taxes and the economy won't improve until the Federal Reserve is taken down.
http://theeconomiccollapseblog.com/a...nomic-problems
It was in the constitution not to have federal taxes, but taxes were added to the constitution to pay the Federal Reserve interest on the money it prints. All American money is created as debt which is pretty disheartening.

[Orruar]

Originally Posted by hatelore bloodlust [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

it isn't so much that I disagree with you, but what option do we have now? We are stuck with the two candidates running. If we vote for the third, you will see that candidate get a small percentage of votes and another 4 years of Obama.

That's like voting to chop off your right leg instead of your left. There is essentially no difference, and you're only validating the 2 party monopoly. If Gary Johnson could pull in 10-15% without being in the debates, it will expose their bullshit system for what it is. Yes the next 4 years will suck, but that's true no matter what. The hope at this point is that a solid 3rd party showing will force them to include that 3rd party in the debates, and in the national dialogue, in the future.

[hatelore bloodlust]

Originally Posted by Orruar [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

That's like voting to chop off your right leg instead of your left. There is essentially no difference, and you're only validating the 2 party monopoly. If Gary Johnson could pull in 10-15% without being in the debates, it will expose their bullshit system for what it is. Yes the next 4 years will suck, but that's true no matter what. The hope at this point is that a solid 3rd party showing will force them to include that 3rd party in the debates, and in the national dialogue, in the future.

Dude your argument holds no water... In 4 more years with Obama, it wouldn't suck, we would probably cease to exist as a nation. You guys argue this point every election. But the bottom line is that he will not pull 15 or 20% percent of the vote. I respect your view and will not resort to name calling like alarti and the two young doctors I was arguing with last night. But it just isn't going to happen man.

[Lexical]

Originally Posted by Lron [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Anyone who votes for Obama after he assassinated a US citizen, Signed the NDAA, Kept Guantanamo open, raided state run marijuana dispensaries heavier than Bush, started new wars without congressional authority, bailed out wall street CEOs who made billions in bonuses the same year they said they needed instant capital infusion from all of us or they were going to go under.... is beyond any kind of persuasion and is a brain dead sheep who is nothing more than a water boy for the democratic party.

Anyone who votes for Romney after he basically designed Obamacare while governor of Mass, claimed on national TV that his state healthcare plan should be implemented on the federal level, was pro choice before he was pro life, signed gun control laws before he was a member of the NRA, was pro bailout, pro stimulus before he was anti bailout/stimulus....is a water boy for the Republican party and is a sheep and immediately surrenders any credibility he has on any topic involving american politics along with the Obama Zombies.

Your choice was clear, Ron Paul was the only one offering substantive change, a real plan for economic recovery and eliminating the national debt/deficit.

You knuckle dragging Republicans and Democrats dont care about actual policy because your IQs are way too low to actually understand the issues so you vote for a team that you think represents you....read this over and over until it sinks in....>>>the republicans and democrats dont represent you <<<

Both Romney and Obama represent big business interest, the military industrial complex and banking elites....that is who they are beholden to.

Time to grow up and do your own research instead of being spoon fed disinformation by the left and right media outlets....remember, they are controlled by the interests i mentioned above.

Ron Paul!? Oh man! I love Ron Paul supporters because they have no idea what the hell they are talking about. Here, I will throw you a softball question and you can tell me how much this lunatic's policies actually work. Please explain to me how in the world does reverting back to the gold standard do anything but damage our economy? But I bet you didn't even know that is what Ron Paul supports, did you?

You are too busy smelling your own farts to actually check what the fuck this gobshite is about. Yes, I agree Ron Pual had SOME good ideas, but you have to understand his bad ideas were so idiotic and crazy that you had to ignore him. I know that this may be hard for you but destroying the government to cut government spending doesn't solve any problems and only leads to anarchy. Go back to the articles of confederation and tell me how long the libertarian party's ideals lasted before crumbling? What was it? 2 months? Go read a book and stop pretending like you know shit.

I have yet to have someone refute any of my claims with supported facts. Show me with math how using a finite resource will support constant economic growth. Show me with math how completely removing all of our fiscal protections will not cause rampant monopolies and inevitably destroy every asset of our economy. In case you didn't know it, but the biggest problem our country is the fact that mega corporations aren't paying their taxes. The only candidate on the ballet who has actually shown any true interest in taxing these entities is Obama. You make the top 100 pay their full 30% in taxes and you will find the budget is much more balanced.

[Humerox]

Originally Posted by Lexical [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Ron Paul!? Oh man! I love Ron Paul supporters because they have no idea what the hell they are talking about. Here, I will throw you a softball question and you can tell me how much this lunatic's policies actually work. Please explain to me how in the world does reverting back to the gold standard do anything but damage our economy? But I bet you didn't even know that is what Ron Paul supports, did you?

Seems like Ron Paul isn't alone...

Republicans Eye Return to Gold Standard

[hatelore bloodlust]

Originally Posted by Humerox [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Seems like Ron Paul isn't alone...

Republicans Eye Return to Gold Standard

That would be one of several steps needed to put us back in the right
direction.

[Alarti0001]

Originally Posted by hatelore bloodlust [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

That would be one of several steps needed to put us back in the right
direction.

Do explain how?

[hatelore bloodlust]

Hey Lexicali, young doctor. Can you explain to all the overly bright individuals on a gaming forum how putting our money back on the gold standard and backing are dollars with real access could be a detriment to our economy. A lot of the financial problems we have today are because another moron president(like Obama) took us off the gold standard. But just like last night, you will most likely resort to name calling instead of answering my simple question.

[Orruar]

Originally Posted by Lexical [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Ron Paul!? Oh man! I love Ron Paul supporters because they have no idea what the hell they are talking about. Here, I will throw you a softball question and you can tell me how much this lunatic's policies actually work. Please explain to me how in the world does reverting back to the gold standard do anything but damage our economy? But I bet you didn't even know that is what Ron Paul supports, did you?

I have yet to have someone refute any of my claims with supported facts. Show me with math how using a finite resource will support constant economic growth. Show me with math how completely removing all of our fiscal protections will not cause rampant monopolies and inevitably destroy every asset of our economy. In case you didn't know it, but the biggest problem our country is the fact that mega corporations aren't paying their taxes. The only candidate on the ballet who has actually shown any true interest in taxing these entities is Obama. You make the top 100 pay their full 30% in taxes and you will find the budget is much more balanced.

Yes, because paper money has had a much better history of success... No paper currency has survived longer than about 40 years. The US dollar has just crossed that threshold. Unlikely it will last another 40. Since you're a historical expert about the period of the articles of confederation, certainly you must know about the Continental, our nation's first experiment with paper money. The experience with that paper money is why the founders required money be backed by gold or silver, so that we wouldn't make such a horrible mistake again. And is it just a coincidence that poverty had decreased steadily during the period of the gold standard, and has flattened out and even increased slightly since we went off it?

You do not need the supply of money to grow at the same rate as the economy... Do you just read talking points from Paul Krugman? This argument has been refuted into irrelevance. If the economy grows faster than the supply of money, goods will become cheaper. You may need smaller denominations of currency, but you don't need a larger supply of money.

Finally, let's investigate your claim that if the top 100 companies paid 30% in corporate income taxes, we'd have a balanced budget. The market cap of the top 100 companies totals to $13.3T. We can assume the P/E is between 10 and 15, so let's put it at 13.3 to make it easy. That means these companies have 1 trillion dollars in earnings. Let's assume they currently pay 0 in taxes, which is a bit unlikely, but I'll give it to you. Raising the tax rate to 30% would increase tax revenues by $300B. This is only a small chunk of the $1.1T deficit. The actual tax rate of the largest corporations is about 18.5% right now (see source below), so your increase to 30% would lead to a $115B increase in federal revenue, which is 10% of the deficit. Way to solve the budget deficit buddy.

Info on corporate tax rates:
http://money.cnn.com/2011/11/03/news...axes/index.htm