Message Board Basketball Forum - InsideHoops

Go Back   Message Board Basketball Forum - InsideHoops > InsideHoops Main Basketball Forums > Off the Court Lounge

Off the Court Lounge Basketball fans talk about everything EXCEPT basketball here

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 11-16-2012, 02:09 AM   #121
bmulls
Great college starter
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 3,678
bmulls has a near all-star reputation herebmulls has a near all-star reputation herebmulls has a near all-star reputation herebmulls has a near all-star reputation herebmulls has a near all-star reputation herebmulls has a near all-star reputation here
Default Re: Romney says Obama won by showering black, Latino & young voters with big gifts.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Droid101

I have a degree in Economics bud. I've sat through dozens of lectures on the housing bubble and I know the theory inside and out. I probably won't watch it.
bmulls is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-16-2012, 02:12 AM   #122
Droid101
5-time NBA All-Star
 
Droid101's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: SoCal
Posts: 11,274
Droid101 is considered a brilliant InsideHoops posterDroid101 is considered a brilliant InsideHoops posterDroid101 is considered a brilliant InsideHoops posterDroid101 is considered a brilliant InsideHoops posterDroid101 is considered a brilliant InsideHoops posterDroid101 is considered a brilliant InsideHoops posterDroid101 is considered a brilliant InsideHoops posterDroid101 is considered a brilliant InsideHoops poster
Default Re: Romney says Obama won by showering black, Latino & young voters with big gifts.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bmulls
I have a degree in Economics bud. I've sat through dozens of lectures on the housing bubble and I know the theory inside and out. I probably won't watch it.
Me too.

Please, just watch it. Seriously. It's a good movie and completely non-partisan. Only about the facts.
Droid101 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-16-2012, 02:35 AM   #123
joe
College superstar
 
joe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 4,252
joe is a pretty well-respected posterjoe is a pretty well-respected posterjoe is a pretty well-respected poster
Default Re: Romney says Obama won by showering black, Latino & young voters with big gifts.

Quote:
Originally Posted by DonDadda59
I'm going to sleep now, so I won't get into the rest of your post until possibly tomorrow, but please make sure to watch the short vid I just posted above.

Just wanted to get some explanation for your statement I quoted. Please show me any data that says tax cuts for the rich is 'good for the economy'. Everything I've seen in terms of hard data and facts shows that high GDP, job creation, and overall economic growth correlates positively to times when the top tax rate was higher. I'm not interested in theory (which we've seen fail over the last decade). Show me evidence.

I'll be looking forward seeing that in the morning. Have a great night

An explanation for what I said requires theory to understand. There is evidence to back it up, but evidence can be very misleading. That's something I've learned 1,000 times over on this site alone. I see the Great Depression as evidence of central banking failure, government stimulus failure, and I see the wonderful year we had in 1946 (when government finally cut spending) as great evidence that the government needs to cut spending today.

But do other people see that? No. If they're predisposed to economic beliefs like yours, they see the exact opposite. The Great Depression is evidence that the free market inevitably causes economic chaos, and that government stimulus of all kinds is good for the economy. What the hell is up with that? Two entirely opposite conclusions drawn from the same evidence.

So how can you know which of these two viewpoints is correct? You need theory. You need a solid theory first, and then you re-examine the facts through the prism of your theory. Your theory is your flashlight in the dark hallways of "evidence."

I'll give you what I consider good evidence for why lower taxes is good for the economy. America in the 19th century. America became an economic superpower in the 19th century, with zero income taxes for most of the century (some income taxes were levied to fund war, but much less than today and not for as long a period). The 19th century saw tremendous rises in living standards for Americans, as we transformed our economy from agricultural to industrial. It was this century that saw the invention of the Steamboat, the price of steel drop tremendously, Railroads enabled country-wide travel, the invention of the sewing machine, and the telegraph. Gas stoves become more common than ever.

What spurred on these inventions was the low amount of regulations and taxes, which enabled entrepreneurs to easily start new businesses. This created the first batch of "retail workers" in America. Instead of farming, you could work the payment booth for the Railroad. You could get a job as a clerk for a local grocery store. This new division of workers is what created the American middle class. Instead of either being born into royalty or being a sustenance farmer, there was something inbetween. And instead of being born a farmer and dying a farmer, there were chances for promotion. If you worked hard, you could become a manager. You could earn a pay raise.

We take these things for granted today, but prior to the 18th-19th century, that simply was not how the world worked. 99% of the people were born poor, they worked their asses off just to survive, and then they died.

Now clearly, 19th century Americans lived much less luxuriously than we do today. They worked in sometimes dangerous conditions, with low pay compared to today's standards. But compared to prior centuries, the truly relevant measure, life had never been better. People moved to the cities, industry boomed, and immigrants flooded our borders in droves- searching for economic freedom that they could only find in the US. Unlike the rest of the world, anyone could become rich here. The governments role wasn't to expropriate and control the people, but to protect them, and otherwise leave them alone.

I have watched the first video you posted, I may get to the second one later but I need to rest my brain a little. I took some notes so I won't forget my thoughts so far.

Now, I've given you what I believe is evidence for lower taxes creating prosperity. In return, explain to me theoretically why higher taxes on the rich would work?

Last edited by joe : 11-16-2012 at 03:02 AM.
joe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-16-2012, 07:58 AM   #124
joe
College superstar
 
joe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 4,252
joe is a pretty well-respected posterjoe is a pretty well-respected posterjoe is a pretty well-respected poster
Default Re: Romney says Obama won by showering black, Latino & young voters with big gifts.

For those who think the repeal of Glass-Steagall caused the financial crisis!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NGl6D1H8qMQ

There were two parts of Glass-Steagall that were meant to work together.

1- The government guarantees bank deposits up to 250,000 dollars
2- the government separates banks into different groups to stop them from taking excessive risk.

The infamous "repeal" of Glass-Steagall only repealed the second item. If the government had simply repealed the entire Glass-Steagall, or better yet never even passed it to begin with, we would have been fine. But you cannot have one without the other! These acts were meant to counter balance each other.

But you're wondering, what kind of problems were caused by repealing only the 2nd part of the act, but keeping the first?

First of all, since bank deposits were backed up by the government, the banks had NO REASON to be safe with your deposits. Just think about it, the bank has 200GRAND in the vault. It can put that entire 200GRAND in the stock market. If the stock goes up, the bank gets PAID! If the stock goes down? The government subsidizes the losses. It's a win win for the banks! Of course they're going to take huge gambles with peoples money.

But banks weren't the only one whose behavior was affected by this regulation. The customers, you, me, the regular guy on the street.. ceased caring about how safe banks were with our money. Think about it, when's the last time you read a consumer report on your bank? When's the last time anyone researched which banks were safest with peoples money? NEVER! We all do plenty of research when we buy a Plasma TV, but we don't even care to read one sentence about the banks we trust with our money! Why? Because we know the government is backing up our deposits! So because of this government deposit insurance, the market, aka US, you and me, the consumers, do not check the banks. We do not care what they do. This gives the banks carte-blanche to act reckless, all because of just one simple regulation. This is what we pro-capitalism people mean when we say that government regulation DISTORTS the market.

And furthermore, the circumstances surrounding the housing collapse in 2008 really had nothing to do with what Glass-Steagall was supposed to regulate. From the Washington Post, not exactly a crazy libertarian source:
Quote:
Facts such as that Bear Stearns, Lehman Brothers and Merrill Lynch — three institutions at the heart of the crisis — were pure investment banks that had never crossed the old line into commercial banking. The same goes for Goldman Sachs, another favorite villain of the left.

The infamous AIG? An insurance firm. New Century Financial? A real estate investment trust. No Glass-Steagall there.

Two of the biggest banks that went under, Wachovia and Washington Mutual, got into trouble the old-fashioned way – largely by making risky loans to homeowners. Bank of America nearly met the same fate, not because it had bought an investment bank but because it had bought Countrywide Financial, a vanilla-variety mortgage lender.

Meanwhile, J.P. Morgan and Wells Fargo — two large banks with big investment banking arms — resisted taking government capital and arguably could have weathered the crisis without it.

The partial repeal of glass-steagall legitimately had something to do with the crisis, but not because it was repealed.. because it was only PARTIALLY repealed. And even with that said, it really had very little to do with the crisis. The overwhelming bulk of blame for the housing boom and subsequent crash rests on the Federal Reserve, coupled with government guarantees provided to the banks.
joe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-16-2012, 08:02 AM   #125
embersyc
Lurker
 
embersyc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Detroit
Posts: 4,033
embersyc has a terrific reputationembersyc has a terrific reputationembersyc has a terrific reputationembersyc has a terrific reputationembersyc has a terrific reputationembersyc has a terrific reputation
Default Re: Romney says Obama won by showering black, Latino & young voters with big gifts.

Quote:
Originally Posted by joe
1- The government guarantees bank deposits up to 250,000 dollars

How well do you know history? Why the **** would anybody use a bank if not for this guarantee? The entire banking industry would be history if not for the FDIC.
embersyc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-16-2012, 08:25 AM   #126
97 bulls
5-time NBA All-Star
 
97 bulls's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,740
97 bulls is the Michael Jordan of posters with the best reputation imaginable97 bulls is the Michael Jordan of posters with the best reputation imaginable97 bulls is the Michael Jordan of posters with the best reputation imaginable97 bulls is the Michael Jordan of posters with the best reputation imaginable97 bulls is the Michael Jordan of posters with the best reputation imaginable97 bulls is the Michael Jordan of posters with the best reputation imaginable97 bulls is the Michael Jordan of posters with the best reputation imaginable97 bulls is the Michael Jordan of posters with the best reputation imaginable97 bulls is the Michael Jordan of posters with the best reputation imaginable97 bulls is the Michael Jordan of posters with the best reputation imaginable97 bulls is the Michael Jordan of posters with the best reputation imaginable
Default Re: Romney says Obama won by showering black, Latino & young voters with big gifts.

Quote:
Originally Posted by embersyc
How well do you know history? Why the **** would anybody use a bank if not for this guarantee? The entire banking industry would be history if not for the FDIC.
Exactly. Wasn't that what happened during the great depression? The stock market ccrashed and as one of the side effects, people either loss their money or pulled it out of the banks. Banks take peoples money and invest it.

Then people were weary about putting money bank into banks and thus why the government had to step in and insure a portion of the money americans put into banks.



That 250000 is insurance for Americans not banks. If we have another crash, banks don't get to keep your money.
97 bulls is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-16-2012, 11:29 AM   #127
DonDadda59
Lord High Executioner
 
DonDadda59's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: The Killing Fields
Posts: 11,955
DonDadda59 is the Michael Jordan of posters with the best reputation imaginableDonDadda59 is the Michael Jordan of posters with the best reputation imaginableDonDadda59 is the Michael Jordan of posters with the best reputation imaginableDonDadda59 is the Michael Jordan of posters with the best reputation imaginableDonDadda59 is the Michael Jordan of posters with the best reputation imaginableDonDadda59 is the Michael Jordan of posters with the best reputation imaginableDonDadda59 is the Michael Jordan of posters with the best reputation imaginableDonDadda59 is the Michael Jordan of posters with the best reputation imaginableDonDadda59 is the Michael Jordan of posters with the best reputation imaginableDonDadda59 is the Michael Jordan of posters with the best reputation imaginableDonDadda59 is the Michael Jordan of posters with the best reputation imaginable
Default Re: Romney says Obama won by showering black, Latino & young voters with big gifts.

Quote:
Originally Posted by joe
An explanation for what I said requires theory to understand. There is evidence to back it up, but evidence can be very misleading. That's something I've learned 1,000 times over on this site alone. I see the Great Depression as evidence of central banking failure, government stimulus failure, and I see the wonderful year we had in 1946 (when government finally cut spending) as great evidence that the government needs to cut spending today.

But do other people see that? No. If they're predisposed to economic beliefs like yours, they see the exact opposite. The Great Depression is evidence that the free market inevitably causes economic chaos, and that government stimulus of all kinds is good for the economy. What the hell is up with that? Two entirely opposite conclusions drawn from the same evidence.

So how can you know which of these two viewpoints is correct? You need theory. You need a solid theory first, and then you re-examine the facts through the prism of your theory. Your theory is your flashlight in the dark hallways of "evidence."

I'll give you what I consider good evidence for why lower taxes is good for the economy. America in the 19th century. America became an economic superpower in the 19th century, with zero income taxes for most of the century (some income taxes were levied to fund war, but much less than today and not for as long a period). The 19th century saw tremendous rises in living standards for Americans, as we transformed our economy from agricultural to industrial. It was this century that saw the invention of the Steamboat, the price of steel drop tremendously, Railroads enabled country-wide travel, the invention of the sewing machine, and the telegraph. Gas stoves become more common than ever.

What spurred on these inventions was the low amount of regulations and taxes, which enabled entrepreneurs to easily start new businesses. This created the first batch of "retail workers" in America. Instead of farming, you could work the payment booth for the Railroad. You could get a job as a clerk for a local grocery store. This new division of workers is what created the American middle class. Instead of either being born into royalty or being a sustenance farmer, there was something inbetween. And instead of being born a farmer and dying a farmer, there were chances for promotion. If you worked hard, you could become a manager. You could earn a pay raise.

We take these things for granted today, but prior to the 18th-19th century, that simply was not how the world worked. 99% of the people were born poor, they worked their asses off just to survive, and then they died.

Now clearly, 19th century Americans lived much less luxuriously than we do today. They worked in sometimes dangerous conditions, with low pay compared to today's standards. But compared to prior centuries, the truly relevant measure, life had never been better. People moved to the cities, industry boomed, and immigrants flooded our borders in droves- searching for economic freedom that they could only find in the US. Unlike the rest of the world, anyone could become rich here. The governments role wasn't to expropriate and control the people, but to protect them, and otherwise leave them alone.

I have watched the first video you posted, I may get to the second one later but I need to rest my brain a little. I took some notes so I won't forget my thoughts so far.

So you took the long way to say what anyone with common sense already knew- there is no factual basis to back up the idea that tax cuts for the wealthy is beneficial to our whole economy. The only place where that works is in theory, which was put into action by Dubya... and failed miserably.

Quote:
Now, I've given you what I believe is evidence for lower taxes creating prosperity. In return, explain to me theoretically why higher taxes on the rich would work?

No need for theory. Here are some proven facts:








BOMBSHELL: New Study Destroys Theory That Tax Cuts Spur Growth

One economic theory has been repeated so often for so long in this country that it has become an accepted fact:

Tax cuts spur growth.

Most Americans have gotten so used to hearing this theory that they don't even question it anymore.

One of our two Presidential candidates is so convinced of the theory that he has built his entire economic plan around it--despite the huge negative impact additional tax cuts would likely have on our debt and deficit.
But is the theory true? Do tax cuts really spur growth?

The answer appears to be "no."

According to a new study by the Congressional Research Service (non-partisan), there's no evidence that tax cuts spur growth.

In fact, although correlation is not causation, when you compare economic growth in periods with declining tax rates versus periods with high tax rates, there seems to be evidence that tax cuts might hurt growth. But we'll leave that possibility for another day.

One thing that tax cuts do unequivocally do--at least tax cuts for the highest earners--is increase economic inequality. Given that economic inequality is one of the biggest problems we face in this country right now, this conclusion is very important.

Before we go to the charts, a few observations.

First, this topic has become highly politicized, so it's impossible to discuss it without people howling that you're just rooting for a particular political team. Second, no one likes paying taxes. Third, everyone would like a tax cut, including me.

So I think we can all agree that everyone would prefer that tax cuts actually did spur economic growth.

...

Well, the bottom line appears to be that low taxes do not spur economic growth and DO cause greater economic inequality.

So, although it sounds like heresy, presidents and Congress-people who actually want to fix the economy might want to consider raising taxes rather than cutting them. Or, at the very least, keeping them the same.


Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/study...#ixzz2CP2lsjny
Rachel Maddow provides facts about 'Trickle Down' leading to the ever-increasing wealth gap

So in summary, as you can clearly see- the theory that tax cuts for the wealthy spur economic growth and everyone reaps the benefits of 'trickle down' wealth is a lie. The facts show that the times of highest job creation, highest gross domestic product (gdp), wealth parity, etc coincide with the times of the highest top tax rate.
DonDadda59 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-16-2012, 02:37 PM   #128
joe
College superstar
 
joe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 4,252
joe is a pretty well-respected posterjoe is a pretty well-respected posterjoe is a pretty well-respected poster
Default Re: Romney says Obama won by showering black, Latino & young voters with big gifts.

Quote:
Originally Posted by embersyc
How well do you know history? Why the **** would anybody use a bank if not for this guarantee? The entire banking industry would be history if not for the FDIC.

No it wouldn't! Banks would have to be more careful with what they do with peoples money, and people would have to be more vigilant with the banks they choose. The banking industry would be MUCH stronger without government guarantees. It's the guarantees that create the moral hazard and allow the banks to behave in ridiculous fashions with our money, you know, the type of things liberals blame on deregulation! Well no, it's regulation that causes that problem.
joe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-16-2012, 02:39 PM   #129
joe
College superstar
 
joe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 4,252
joe is a pretty well-respected posterjoe is a pretty well-respected posterjoe is a pretty well-respected poster
Default Re: Romney says Obama won by showering black, Latino & young voters with big gifts.

Quote:
Originally Posted by 97 bulls
Exactly. Wasn't that what happened during the great depression? The stock market ccrashed and as one of the side effects, people either loss their money or pulled it out of the banks. Banks take peoples money and invest it.

Then people were weary about putting money bank into banks and thus why the government had to step in and insure a portion of the money americans put into banks.



That 250000 is insurance for Americans not banks. If we have another crash, banks don't get to keep your money.

During the Great Depression, very few people lost their money due to bank failures. It was propaganda back then and it's propaganda now. It was only 2-3% of deposits that were lost.

Last edited by joe : 11-16-2012 at 02:41 PM.
joe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-16-2012, 02:41 PM   #130
joe
College superstar
 
joe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 4,252
joe is a pretty well-respected posterjoe is a pretty well-respected posterjoe is a pretty well-respected poster
Default Re: Romney says Obama won by showering black, Latino & young voters with big gifts.

Quote:
Originally Posted by DonDadda59
So you took the long way to say what anyone with common sense already knew- there is no factual basis to back up the idea that tax cuts for the wealthy is beneficial to our whole economy. The only place where that works is in theory, which was put into action by Dubya... and failed miserably.



No need for theory. Here are some proven facts:








BOMBSHELL: New Study Destroys Theory That Tax Cuts Spur Growth

One economic theory has been repeated so often for so long in this country that it has become an accepted fact:

Tax cuts spur growth.

Most Americans have gotten so used to hearing this theory that they don't even question it anymore.

One of our two Presidential candidates is so convinced of the theory that he has built his entire economic plan around it--despite the huge negative impact additional tax cuts would likely have on our debt and deficit.
But is the theory true? Do tax cuts really spur growth?

The answer appears to be "no."

According to a new study by the Congressional Research Service (non-partisan), there's no evidence that tax cuts spur growth.

In fact, although correlation is not causation, when you compare economic growth in periods with declining tax rates versus periods with high tax rates, there seems to be evidence that tax cuts might hurt growth. But we'll leave that possibility for another day.

One thing that tax cuts do unequivocally do--at least tax cuts for the highest earners--is increase economic inequality. Given that economic inequality is one of the biggest problems we face in this country right now, this conclusion is very important.

Before we go to the charts, a few observations.

First, this topic has become highly politicized, so it's impossible to discuss it without people howling that you're just rooting for a particular political team. Second, no one likes paying taxes. Third, everyone would like a tax cut, including me.

So I think we can all agree that everyone would prefer that tax cuts actually did spur economic growth.

...

Well, the bottom line appears to be that low taxes do not spur economic growth and DO cause greater economic inequality.

So, although it sounds like heresy, presidents and Congress-people who actually want to fix the economy might want to consider raising taxes rather than cutting them. Or, at the very least, keeping them the same.


Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/study...#ixzz2CP2lsjny
Rachel Maddow provides facts about 'Trickle Down' leading to the ever-increasing wealth gap

So in summary, as you can clearly see- the theory that tax cuts for the wealthy spur economic growth and everyone reaps the benefits of 'trickle down' wealth is a lie. The facts show that the times of highest job creation, highest gross domestic product (gdp), wealth parity, etc coincide with the times of the highest top tax rate.

Will respond later.. work calls.

Very quickly I'll say, why the hell is income inequality a problem? That's one of the things that are just assumed to be a problem, but really aren't. Why does it matter how much richer the rich are than the poor? The only thing that's important is how rich the POOR are. If the poor are living like Kings, does it matter if the rich are 100x richer than them? No. Would you rather a system where we have equality..... with everyone being equally broke?

Anyway, wish I could get into it more right now but AHHH, gotta go.
joe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-16-2012, 02:49 PM   #131
Droid101
5-time NBA All-Star
 
Droid101's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: SoCal
Posts: 11,274
Droid101 is considered a brilliant InsideHoops posterDroid101 is considered a brilliant InsideHoops posterDroid101 is considered a brilliant InsideHoops posterDroid101 is considered a brilliant InsideHoops posterDroid101 is considered a brilliant InsideHoops posterDroid101 is considered a brilliant InsideHoops posterDroid101 is considered a brilliant InsideHoops posterDroid101 is considered a brilliant InsideHoops poster
Default Re: Romney says Obama won by showering black, Latino & young voters with big gifts.

Quote:
Originally Posted by joe
Why does it matter how much richer the rich are than the poor? The only thing that's important is how rich the POOR are. If the poor are living like Kings, does it matter if the rich are 100x richer than them? No.
Well, they aren't. Which is why we need to funnel some money down there so maybe they can live, period.

Anyway, income disparity IS a big deal if the poor can't eat. If it gets too big, this happens:


Last edited by Droid101 : 11-16-2012 at 02:52 PM.
Droid101 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-16-2012, 03:08 PM   #132
Math2
Local High School Star
 
Math2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 1,159
Math2 posts stuff that is definitely making some people angryMath2 posts stuff that is definitely making some people angry
Default Re: Romney says Obama won by showering black, Latino & young voters with big gifts.

Quote:
Originally Posted by DonDadda59
Let's continue the Bush tax cuts and let's give the big banks and lenders the green light to gamble us into a depression. That worked wonders for the country recently.

Again, this isn't a question of theory. We've seen the experiment play out in front of our eyes. It simply does not work. There's no way around it. The Republican fundamentals of economy were put to the test- we were supposed to see our economy boom due to the 'trickle down' of the rich getting richer and the financial sector being free to do as they please. Instead we got a recession that we only recently began to climb out of, that could've turned into a depression had someone like Mitt Romney been in power and allowed the financial and automobile sectors to go under as he wanted.

This is not a topic of debate. The Norquist plan is a complete and utter failure. The House Republicans need to cut ties with his failed philosophies and work with the President to undo the damage he caused and to start living in reality starting tomorrow morning


You want a system that simply does not work? Communism, socialism, austerity. It DOES NOT WORK. It hasn't worked anywhere else before, and it's not going to work here.
Math2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-16-2012, 03:19 PM   #133
Droid101
5-time NBA All-Star
 
Droid101's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: SoCal
Posts: 11,274
Droid101 is considered a brilliant InsideHoops posterDroid101 is considered a brilliant InsideHoops posterDroid101 is considered a brilliant InsideHoops posterDroid101 is considered a brilliant InsideHoops posterDroid101 is considered a brilliant InsideHoops posterDroid101 is considered a brilliant InsideHoops posterDroid101 is considered a brilliant InsideHoops posterDroid101 is considered a brilliant InsideHoops poster
Default Re: Romney says Obama won by showering black, Latino & young voters with big gifts.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Math2
You want a system that simply does not work? Communism, socialism, austerity. It DOES NOT WORK. It hasn't worked anywhere else before, and it's not going to work here.
You know what else does not work? Straight up Capitalism.

Guess what does work? A mixture of capitalism and socialism... you know, kind of like what we have had here in America for quite a long time.
Droid101 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-16-2012, 03:51 PM   #134
Math2
Local High School Star
 
Math2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 1,159
Math2 posts stuff that is definitely making some people angryMath2 posts stuff that is definitely making some people angry
Default Re: Romney says Obama won by showering black, Latino & young voters with big gifts.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Droid101
You know what else does not work? Straight up Capitalism.

Guess what does work? A mixture of capitalism and socialism... you know, kind of like what we have had here in America for quite a long time.

It's done a lot of good as of late. Massive debt, and unsustainable welfare systems. I'm sure that's what we set out to do when we adopted our system.
Math2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-16-2012, 04:17 PM   #135
Droid101
5-time NBA All-Star
 
Droid101's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: SoCal
Posts: 11,274
Droid101 is considered a brilliant InsideHoops posterDroid101 is considered a brilliant InsideHoops posterDroid101 is considered a brilliant InsideHoops posterDroid101 is considered a brilliant InsideHoops posterDroid101 is considered a brilliant InsideHoops posterDroid101 is considered a brilliant InsideHoops posterDroid101 is considered a brilliant InsideHoops posterDroid101 is considered a brilliant InsideHoops poster
Default Re: Romney says Obama won by showering black, Latino & young voters with big gifts.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Math2
It's done a lot of good as of late. Massive debt, and unsustainable welfare systems. I'm sure that's what we set out to do when we adopted our system.
I'm done with you. You don't back anything you say up with facts, just mindless talking points from Rush or Beck. It's maddening.

Droid101 is offline   Reply With Quote
This NBA Basketball News Website Sponsored by:
Reply


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:38 AM.




NBA Basketball Forum Key Links:
InsideHoops Home
NBA Rumors
Basketball Blog
NBA Daily Recaps
NBA Videos
Fantasy Basketball
NBA Mock Draft
NBA Free Agents
All-Star Weekend
---
High School Basketball
Streetball
---
InsideHoops Twitter
Search Our Site















Powered by vBulletin Version 3.5.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd. Terms of Use/Service | Privacy Policy