|
Birth control is far, far less decided than gun control. How many gun stores have picket lines outside on a daily basis, and have to have special employees/volunteers to escort people in so that they won't be driven off by vicious anti-gun protestors? When was the last time a gun store owner was assassinated by an anti-gun fanatic? There are people that are strongly anti-gun, but the current battle-lines are on whether you should be able to bring them into your college classroom, not whether you should be able to get them at all.
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2012 16:04
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 17, 2024 03:15 |
|
|
Once the election was called, the evangelicals on my Facebook feed all seemed to start freaking out in the exact same manner. First, it was posts saying things like "God is in control and I will continue to pray for our nation" that are supposed to sound innocuous, but considering the circumstances seem to indicate fear more so than actual concern. Then about yesterday afternoon I started seeing people liking all of these statuses from pastors and Christian speakers and it all boils down to "America is choosing to kill babies and let gays get married so it will fall but God will have his glory shine through everything." If these posts are any indication, the Republicans will have an interesting choice to make whether they go more moderate or if they continue to stick with evangelicals. Of course the other thing to keep in mind this is Texas and apparently some conservatives are already talking about secession. 
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2012 16:57
|
|
|
Ratmtattat posted:Once the election was called, the evangelicals on my Facebook feed all seemed to start freaking out in the exact same manner. Hey if we let Texas secede Puerto Rico joining won't make everyone have to rebuy their flags! 
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2012 17:00
|
|
|
Sarion posted:One of the people I get into political discussions with on Facebook is much more calm and reasonable than most of the stuff I see. My wife thinks she may have actually voted for Obama this year because she had mentioned in the past how much she hated Mitt Romney, but generally she's one of those people who is really well meaning and a good heart, but bats Republican and accepts their talking points because that's her team. In any case, whether she voted Obama and wanted to feel better about her decision, or if she was just accepting the results and wanted to know it would be ok; she asked me if I could send her a message explaining how Obama's plan to tax small businesses wouldn't result in higher costs for her family. So this is what I sent her: Politifact had this in the article that you posted, but I'm not sure I'm following it correctly. quote:Finally, as we suggested earlier, reporting income from an S-corporation or a partnership does not necessarily confer the title of small business owner. Anyone who earns money from a source other than a regular job -- for instance consulting or public speaking -- may report it as income from an S-corporation. So too might those who make most of their income from partnerships, such as law firms and medical practices. And it could include investors who have little involvement in the day-to-day operations of a company. My reasoning for this is that my Dad and I work at a family owned (s corporation) company. He's a stockholder, I'm not. He's constantly pissed about high taxes, and my response to him has always been that his taxes are completely hosed up because of the s corporation part, so his taxes are very different than the average persons. As I know this will inevitably come up again in conversation at some point in the near future, I'd just like to have some info to give him. AFewBricksShy fucked around with this message at 17:06 on Nov 8, 2012 |
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2012 17:02
|
|
|
Ratmtattat posted:Once the election was called, the evangelicals on my Facebook feed all seemed to start freaking out in the exact same manner. I don't really see why republicans can't switch to a more moderate stance on things like abortion and gay rights. If polls and this election are any indicator, they're clearly what people want. Conservative evangelicals are going to continue voting for republicans no matter what their stances are, so long as the candidates stay somewhat further to the right of their democratic counterparts. A "lesser of two evils" sort of thing. If anything, I'm very optimistic about the affect this will have on our future political climate. The past 4 political years have been so heavily entrenched in conservative rhetoric, and it's so clear that social conservatism isn't something the majority wants. I'm hoping more moderate republicans will take hold of the political reins of their party in 2016. All things considered, I would have probably voted for Jon Huntsman this election if he were the republican candidate.
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2012 17:06
|
|
|
Dirty Job posted:I don't really see why republicans can't switch to a more moderate stance on things like abortion and gay rights. If polls and this election are any indicator, they're clearly what people want. Conservative evangelicals are going to continue voting for republicans no matter what their stances are, so long as the candidates stay somewhat further to the right of their democratic counterparts. A "lesser of two evils" sort of thing.
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2012 17:12
|
|
|
Sarion posted:One of the people I get into political discussions with on Facebook is much more calm and reasonable than most of the stuff I see. My wife thinks she may have actually voted for Obama this year because she had mentioned in the past how much she hated Mitt Romney, but generally she's one of those people who is really well meaning and a good heart, but bats Republican and accepts their talking points because that's her team. In any case, whether she voted Obama and wanted to feel better about her decision, or if she was just accepting the results and wanted to know it would be ok; she asked me if I could send her a message explaining how Obama's plan to tax small businesses wouldn't result in higher costs for her family. So this is what I sent her:
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2012 17:17
|
|
|
Ashcans posted:Birth control is far, far less decided than gun control. How many gun stores have picket lines outside on a daily basis, and have to have special employees/volunteers to escort people in so that they won't be driven off by vicious anti-gun protestors? When was the last time a gun store owner was assassinated by an anti-gun fanatic? There are people that are strongly anti-gun, but the current battle-lines are on whether you should be able to bring them into your college classroom, not whether you should be able to get them at all. I'm talking politically. Todd Akin ruined himself a certain senate seat by being against abortions for rape victims - an opinion a true christian needs to hold. Any future republican candidate needs to be really careful how he communicates such an opposition. It'll probably be better for them not to mention abortion at all because it can only lose them votes from moderates. And that's exactly how leftist politicians that privately hold anti-gun opinions need to act.
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2012 17:24
|
|
|
Doctor Spaceman posted:They have to make it through the primaries / nomination process to get to that stage though. Which is basically a contest to see who can twist the teachings of Christ into hateful bigotry as eloquently as possible.
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2012 17:42
|
|
|
AFewBricksShy posted:This is awesome, and I apologize for the derail, but is there any chance you could explain how the taxes would effect an S corporation? From a quick look at them, it looks like S Corps are pass-through instruments, which means that instead of the corporation actually paying Corporate Income Tax, the profit/loss of the business is "passed through" to the personal income taxes of the owners in proportion to what percentage of the business they own. The key difference appears to be that the owners are taxed on the company's profit even if that profit is not distributed among the owners. So, if your dad owns 50% of the company and the company makes $400k yearly profit, he's going to have to pay income tax on $200k regardless of whether or not the company actually distributes the $400k in profits amongst the owners. It seems most S Corps take care of this, though, by writing in shareholder agreements that if the corporation passes through profit $x to a shareholder, resulting in $y in taxes, the corporation must distribute at least $y to the shareholder to cover the tax. It sounds like this is on top of salary. So, say your dad makes $100k from working at the company, his personal share of the company's yearly profit would have to be $150k before he saw any impact from the loss of the top-end Bush Tax Cuts. Otherwise the explanation in that item is basically still correct for your dad, with the situation really only changing if he had been involved with a non-pass-through entity.
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2012 20:17
|
|
|
My cousin had a complete meltdown on Facebook and is now fleeing the state to escape Obama or something.      He also lives in one of the most expensive counties in the country (Santa Barabra) and bought a new truck last year so I don't know what he's talking about having no money.
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2012 20:23
|
|
|
thefncrow posted:From a quick look at them, it looks like S Corps are pass-through instruments, which means that instead of the corporation actually paying Corporate Income Tax, the profit/loss of the business is "passed through" to the personal income taxes of the owners in proportion to what percentage of the business they own. Thank you for this, I'm positive that I'll be able to use this in the near future.
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2012 20:49
|
|
|
Why did you censor the Iguanas name, he looks relaxed.
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2012 20:53
|
|
|
I am confused, is he admitting to committing tax fraud for a larger return because the illegally gained money would have "gone into the economy"
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2012 21:05
|
|
|
Wow man, my brother just posted this:quote:Subject: White Vote 2012 Where could he have possibly gotten this information? Is this based on exit polls? Because last I checked, ballots didn't have a "Are you white?" field on them.
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2012 21:09
|
|
|
f#a# posted:Wow man, my brother just posted this: Definitely exit polls, and it's likely true. Too bad we let non whites vote 
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2012 21:13
|
|
|
f#a# posted:Wow man, my brother just posted this: Ask him why 60% of white people are gullible idiots? I assume that's what he's "Just sayin'" right?
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2012 21:18
|
|
|
f#a# posted:Wow man, my brother just posted this:  How dare you accuse me of being a racist you're the real racist!
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2012 21:19
|
|
|
How does this jibe with the "black people vote Obama because they're racist" meme, or is this just another case of accusing someone else of doing what you're doing?
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2012 21:21
|
|
|
f#a# posted:Wow man, my brother just posted this: Do the same thing 4 times for him with Women, Black, Hispanic, and Asian and send the results to him.
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2012 21:22
|
|
|
This is from a friend's feed (notice the underlined part): 
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2012 21:23
|
|
|
FCKGW posted:
Hahaha yes move to Eugene, that bastion of conservative values. Also, it says he's near Nipomo which is San Luis Obispo county. And if Nipomo's not right-wing enough for him, well, good luck anywhere on the west coast I guess
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2012 21:27
|
|
|
I would just call him out on it: "So, you're just sayin' you wish only white people were allowed to vote? Democracy: only people like me should have a say!"
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2012 21:29
|
|
|
Absurd Alhazred posted:This is from a friend's feed (notice the underlined part):  Even Republicans support unemployment insurance.
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2012 21:30
|
|
|
Dead Beef posted:Wh-... how... how can y-... He'd get himself out of the hole by his own bootstraps if Obama would just let go of the rope! 
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2012 21:34
|
|
|
Dead Beef posted:Wh-... how... how can y-... Sure, for their friends and family who they know are just in a temporary bad spot. They're not like those other lazy moochers out there with their iphones and tattoos and giant rims playing xbox all day. Let me tell you about this one I saw in line at the supermarket the other day...
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2012 21:38
|
|
|
Ratmtattat posted:Of course the other thing to keep in mind this is Texas and apparently some conservatives are already talking about secession. One of the arguments I've heard is "How would they stop us, we have Ft. Hood." Right, because some soldier from New Jersey or Maine or some such is going to commit treason and fight for whatever state they happen to be stationed in at the moment.
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2012 21:56
|
|
|
800peepee51doodoo posted:Hahaha yes move to Eugene, that bastion of conservative values. I grew up in Nipomo, CA and it is backwater as gently caress. My fathers side of the family all lives there and they are mostly racist hicks. the younger generation has mostly left, and those that stayed are now full blown bigots that don't have an original thought in their head.
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2012 22:44
|
|
|
Ah yes, that was my favorite part of the old Robin Hood legend: when he stole from people who worked hard to make money and gave it to lazy people.
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2012 23:03
|
|
|
This is starting to pop up on facebook and conservatie blogs: http://www.duffelblog.com/2012/11/military-absentee-ballots-delivered-one-day-late-would-have-swung-election-for-romney/quote:WASHINGTON, DC – Sources confirmed today that hundreds of thousands of military absentee ballots were delivered hours after the deadline for them to be counted, with preliminary counts showing that they would have overturned the vote in several states and brought a victory for Governor Mitt Romney.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2012 00:36
|
|
|
It's from a satire site. Look at the other articles.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2012 00:40
|
|
|
 Guess I took it at face value since some conservatives have been asking about military votes, and there were some other stories on google when I searched, but I guess that was for like 5,000 lbs of mail catching on fire last month or something.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2012 01:18
|
|
|
FCKGW posted:My cousin had a complete meltdown on Facebook and is now fleeing the state to escape Obama or something. That iguana looks pretty dehydrated. OBAMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMA!
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2012 01:27
|
|
|
The best way to tell if something's bullshit is to look for specifics and search for those. Apparently, "Marine Sergeant John Davis" is a character from Call of Duty.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2012 01:32
|
|
|
blue posted:California is just not reasonable for us, or any hard working family anymore. I could go to work full time and put my kids in daycare or live off of welfare, and maybe we could get by, but we deserve better. Ugh, her entitlement makes me SICK
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2012 02:34
|
|
|
Who started and/or brought back the "Welfare MOOCHERS don't work and are lazy and take from us working folk". I mean I know it's been around since Reagan (or before? I know he made it popular) but I've only started hearing it again recently. And it's all they fuckin' talk about. Like every goddamn post or email or speech talks about it. I remember hearing the republicans (and their PR firm, "conservative media") last year start saying "half of american's don't pay income tax" which pretty much immediately turned into "HALF OF AMERICANS DON'T PAY ANY TAXES!!!!". Is that where this (re-)started?
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2012 02:40
|
|
|
myron cope posted:Who started and/or brought back the "Welfare MOOCHERS don't work and are lazy and take from us working folk". I mean I know it's been around since Reagan (or before? I know he made it popular) but I've only started hearing it again recently. And it's all they fuckin' talk about. Like every goddamn post or email or speech talks about it. I remember hearing the republicans (and their PR firm, "conservative media") last year start saying "half of american's don't pay income tax" which pretty much immediately turned into "HALF OF AMERICANS DON'T PAY ANY TAXES!!!!". Is that where this (re-)started? It really came back during the '08 campaign, when Obama made an unscripted comment about "spreading the wealth around." It was a really unfortunate way of trying to explain upper-class taxation in layman's terms, and conservatives seized on it and cried socialism. Needless to say, it stuck. It also plays into the conservative tendency to emphasize Obama's "otherness" (blackness) and pander to deep-seated racist anxieties about white, working class money being taken away and given to welfare queens.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2012 02:45
|
|
|
I have a question about a facebook discussion over Obamacare. What she posted: quote:Unfortunately, the only way established to pay for all the additional influx to medicaid was embedded in the part of Obamacare that the Supreme Court ruled as unconstitutional. The measures that have already gone into place have already led doctors in California and other places to stop taking Medicare patients. The private insurance companies as well as medicare are making up for their additional costs by decreasing physician and hospital reimbursement. If the doctors and hospitals are not getting paid enough, they will not be able to perform more involved procedures and tests, hence, despite having insurance the system will not afford to be able to treat the really sick patients, even if the treatments exist to do so. Can anyone comment on whether this actually goes on? I'm at a loss for a response, and google's not helping.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2012 02:53
|
|
|
tvb posted:It really came back during the '08 campaign, when Obama made an unscripted comment about "spreading the wealth around." It was a really unfortunate way of trying to explain upper-class taxation in layman's terms, and conservatives seized on it and cried socialism. Needless to say, it stuck. It's sad that when people hear "redistribution" or "spreading the wealth" they picture the country turning into a socialist country. People don't understand that reinvestment in the country through education, infrastructure, and R&D helps the country and is a form of "spreading the wealth". Even K-12 is effectively a form of socialism. I may not have kids, but my tax dollars go to support public schools, which is good, because an educated populace leads to a stronger, more capable country. This may be a "socialist-type" policy, but it doesn't mean we're a top-down socialist country, or on a slippery slope to socialism.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2012 02:54
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 17, 2024 03:15 |
|
|
Empire State posted:I have a question about a facebook discussion over Obamacare. She's half-right. It does call for reduced payments to doctors for procedures. Doctors may choose to stop taking Medicaid/Medicare if the insurance companies offer substantially more money. Where she's wrong is that the Supreme Court struck down part of Obamacare as unconstitutional. They said that hospitals couldn't be stripped of their funding if they refused the new Medicare payment-scheme, but that they could be denied any future increase of funding. I highly doubt any hospital will risk their longterm funding viability over not making as good of a profit margin. Now, individual general practitioners might actually suffer, because they have to rent equipment/pay overhead, and a loss of income might mean the difference between making ends meet or not. Obamacare truly sucks in that it does absolutely jack poo poo about the outrageous insurance prices (both what insurances ask from doctors and what they offer to doctors). E: This part is anecdotal, but I've heard from people who work in doctor's offices that Medicare and Medicaid are really awful about payments. They don't return calls often, they take forever to pay, and when they do pay, it's at a fraction what an insurance company would. If that's true, I would guess it would have to do with the fact that Medicaid and Medicare are constantly under the loving knife from Republicans. The Medicaid office around here is only open every other Wednesday, so I wouldn't be surprised if the two underpaid, overstressed people who run it take a month to get back to a doctor about something. XyloJW fucked around with this message at 03:05 on Nov 9, 2012 |
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2012 03:01
|
|